Make Way For The New Woodstock Revolution!

yes, because they are taught that in schools and universities. they are taught to be a part of the utopian megamachine. fortunately, they do not succeed in blinding everyone - quite a large number of people hates money and values life itself... these people can open the eyes of others.

Starving is part of life. I mean, real life, not synthetic life. As for the rest, please read the post I linked to above.

 

heres what u gotta do u first you gotta have some money i don't know were ur gonna get it but u need it. then once you've got the money you need to gather up about 10 of your friends and get on a hippy bus or car or somthing and go across the nation state to state town to town putting up fliers every where in every state you should get a bunch of people and then eventually once you have enough people you will be recognized and put on the news and as soon as that happens the rest will unfold.

 

Mmm... you won't convince much people with this argument.

 

wow........this has become fantastical.

 

Communism and socialism on a large scale leads to stagnation. Innovation is reached by the desire to better yourself and your situation. Rising above your current station. If all that you do belongs to all, how will you do this? Not everyone is giving and generous. Human nature is not as idealistic as you think it is.

 

Don't take it for granted that innovation is a good thing. Think where it leads in the long run. If you're young, think where it leads in the short time that lies within your unfortunate lifetime. That is, if you have the courage to think about it...

 

As you sit at your desk. Typing on your computer. Enjoying your furnace in the winter, or AC in the summer. Cooking dinner in the microwave or stove. Watching the news on TV. Driving your car, or riding the bus. Wearing those jeans.

Ah yes, innovation is a terrible thing, we would be much better off without them. I have seen the light.

I am 40 yrs old. I have seen the good and the bad come with innovation. I have seen capitalism at its worst and its best.

I choose capitalism for a large scale economy. Socialism for our family unit.

 

The only reason I use a computer is because we live in the age of information, and not using the internet in this society, as someone already pointed out, would be equivalent to a death sentence. Because the system is built that way. However, before the internet was invented, people lived their life just fine and enjoyed it on a greater scale than they do today.

I am sorry if these are the most enjoyable things in your life (otherwise you wouldn't have mentioned them), but, neither of the two was needed before it was invented. Furthermore, cave people survived without any clothes whatsoever.

You may find this surprising, but I use neither the micromave nor the t.v. And I get along just fine.

Cars were not needed before they were invented. Not because "oh, but it made it easier", but because town were built in such a way that did not require cars. In fact, I believe Chinese are now working on a project, the point of which is to build a large green city according to all rules, such that no cars would be needed in it, and such that to promote a healthy lifestyle of using bicycles or just walking.

You can't choose both. It's one or the other, since there is no society that implements both at once. Oh, and what's so good about large scale economy again?

 

Capitalism- places money over people
socialism- government does a shit job on everything, its the last thing I want. Walter Reed, FEMA in New Orleans......... the list goes on.

 

The point is, none of these innovations would be here if it were not for people wanting to better their situation. Capitalism encourages that. You can point out the fact that we got along fine without them before, but that does not negate the fact that you, along with most everyone else in industrial countries use them every day.
We got along fine without many medicines and treatments in the past, but that does not mean we should give up all research into preventing and curing ailments. As much as it seems wrong, the main reason the drug companies work on these problems is to increase the shareholders profits.
Are the things I mentioned the most important things in my life? No, and to assume so is arrogant on your part. I merely mentioned a few items that most people use.
And I can and have chosen both, I work in a capitalistic society to earn money. All that I earn is in turn given over to our "family unit" for the good of all. This unit consists of two large families living together and sharing all the goods. Our own little commune if you will.
Even the USSR could not let go of capitalism entirely, they could not produce all that they needed, and had to buy resources from capitalistic sources. Eventually it was capitalism that overwhelmed the USSR, because the people wanted more than what the government could provide. Call it greed, but that is a basic human emotion that drives most of us.

 

Wrong. None of these innovations would be here if not for the few innovators with ingenious propaganda marketing campaigns.

That is because the system is set up in such a way as to promote the use of goods and to eliminate the possibility of not using them as one of the means of promotion.

Actually, we should. Other than the fact that the so-called "medicines and treatments" treat the symptoms and not the causes, thereby furthering whatever disease they treat, the diseases arise from civilization, and will disappear together with it as soon as people resume natural lifestyles. Furthermore, ancient healing remedies that did not involve science, for the most part, have always worked better than modern science-based drugs. So yes, you're right - the only real benefit of commercial medicine is profit making. Everything else that comes with it is of great harm.

That's plausible. But, think about it: you still work more than you would have needed to sustain yourself and your family if you lived in nature and had direct access to your surroundings.

Actually, USSR is now working to restrict private businesses, implement censorship, and I suspect it is also going to revert back to communism to some extent. I find these plausible, because private businesses are what gives rise to all corruption. And, once again, it wasn't the people who wanted more, but the corrupt leaders who a) removed censhorship, thereby communicating the knowledge about goods that noone has ever needed, and b) brainwashed people into wanting and needing these goods. So, bottom line is, it's not the people - it's those who stands in the leadership positions who are the origin of all the problems.

 

Thus capitalism, no argument there.

As I have said, greed is part of human nature and drives our desire to better ourselves. To promote this natural desire in order to sell your product is simply marketing. Maybe not the most moral of promotions, but one of the easiest. Corporate responsibility is one thing that is slowly coming around. But we have a long way to go.

Vaccines, antivirals, antibiotics (overused, I know) and other medicines do heal, or prevent. Not all medicines are good, or even moral. But we should not cut off the arm to spite finger. We can still promote natural remedies, as many in this forum do.

LOL, I grew up on a farm and worked my a** off. I enjoy my work, it gives me great satisfaction. I do not buy that "living off the land" is easy. Will you force everyone out of the cities and make them rely on the land? Pol Pot did this in Cambodia as part of his agrarian communism. Amnesty International estimated 1.4 million people died.

So you are advocating censorship for the good of the people? What they do not know can not hurt them? The people are not brainwashed into wanting things. They see things that are not available to them and they want it. But I guess if they are restricted in what they see available, they will not want it. This is not freedom. It is government control over what the government feels is best for the people. It is what America is headed for and I for one will oppose it every step of the way.
BTW, there is no longer any USSR.

 

Chemicals you mentioned may shut down a disease, but, unfortunately, "disease" is only a symptom of a deeper problem that cannot be fixed with scientific methods. The symptom is suppressed, but the root problem remains and later re-appears, sometimes as an enitrely different disease...

I am not talking about a farm [part of civilization], I am talking about a wild field [part of nature] that has everything that is needed to sustain the species that live within that field. For example, horses eat grass, of which there is more than they need, and they need not to do anything other than being a part of nature. Same was true for hunter-gatherers that existed before the dawn of civilization: any given area contained enough resources to sustain the life of people who lived there, without those people having to do anything other than live as part of nature. That is, until someone invented farming & division of labor, at which point people gradually started using up much more than they practically needed.

As it was mentioned many times in this thread, people lived for 100,000's of years without knowing of greed, farming, division of labor, or anything that stems from these. This includes native americans, australian aborigenes, people from crete, and others. Greed was not a part of those humans' nature before it was introduced by a few mutants of europeans origin.

Greed is a disease that can be cured [for real! via certain herbs], a programmed mindset, whose success comes from the fact that a lot of people do not think for themselves. It can be de-programmed, and it shall. People's attitudes are changing faster than ever due to the increasing rates of political & technological oppression. A revolution is coming, which you, most likely, will not survive...

 

Antibiotics, vaccinations, and antivirals destroy the disease causing agent. Although many drugs do just work on the symptoms. As I said above, I have nothing against natural remedies.

That is all well and good, but how do you propose to get people to live off the land? Again I ask, will you do as Pol Pot did in Cambodia and force people out of the cities to die by the million?

No greed? No division of labor? Have you never heard of the Aztecs? The Mesopotamians? The Persian Empire? The Khans?, The Shogun? Not infected by Europeans, but showing human nature. What proof do you have? I say that civilizations progressed based on greed. The desire to better ones situation. Coveting that which you do not have. Even the Boshivecs were inspired by greed and envy. A lower class uprising.
And you still have not answered my inquiry into whether you support government censorship for the good of the people.

 

Exactly it's survival of the fittest. You don't see lions, bears, and gazelle's going to Super Fresh to stock up on food for the next week do you??? The world we live in isn't real, it's a composite additive of corporte domination of society to control the allmighty dollar and ultimately our lives........

 

So, survival of the fittest. does that give the smarter human, who can create and mold its own environment, a distinct advantage? Yes it does. What is synthetic about that? What is unnatural about a creature using its brains to make its life easier? Are humans not a part of nature too?
I believe as a dominate species, we have the responsibility to take care of of the earth, but we are no less a part of nature than any other creature on earth.

 

I agreed with most of what you said except for this excerpt. We DO have the responsibility but we DONT take care of the earth. Look out your window and you DONT see the fields of grass and flowers, the trees and forests, the buffalo, the rabbits, the bears, the deer, etc. You see billiongs of huge steel and concrete buildings, hundreds of thousands of miles of asphalt and gravel roads, steel boxes riding around releasing toxic fumes, millions and millions of tons of trash being piled up in landfills and for what?? FOR WHAT??

But yeah, we humans are DEFINITELY doing "our part" to take care of the earth right???

 

^^^^^
Never said we were doing a good job, just said that I felt it our responsibility to take care of the earth. Of course we need to do better.

 

As I said, disease causing agent is often just a physical manifestation of a deeper problem. I am not talking about viruses, because they are purely physical and attack the physical matter directly. I am talking about individual things, such as recurring cold, cancer, headache in a certain spot, and things like that, for which the best medicine can do is offer antibiotics, chemotherapy, or anethetics, respectively.
However, these just remove the symptoms, which then occur again and again and again. This is why modern medicine cannot find a solid explanation for cancer, which seems to come out of nowhere, for headaches that occur without any reason, for fainting or seizures as applicable to people who seem to be physically normal, according to tests like MRI, Cat Scan, and others.
As long as science attempts to cure the symptoms of these diseases, it will not be successful. Herbs, however, have the power to heal the deeper causes of these problems, including cancer, because, believe it or not, there are many plants which are much more spiritually and energetically developed than humans...

Also, it is a known fact that antibiotics, vaccinations, etc. also destroy some of the microbes that serve positive and needed functions within the organism. This does not happen when you use herbal remedies, but herbal remedies often are more effective than their modern chemical analogs.

Precisely. What Pol Pot did was a good thing. It's called "survival of the fittest". Strongest ones will live, the rest will die.
It's the way of nature. There is currently a lot more people than would have existed in natural conditions, and that will soon result in a cataclysm, one reason being that earth's resources will soon be depleted. So, restoring the balance is the only way to save the earth...

Ignorance is a bliss: Recall the story about Adam & Eve.
Before they bit the apple of knowledge, they were not bothered by the fact that they were naked, because they were simply not aware of either the fact or the "it's a bad thing" mindset.
Once they became aware of it, however, they had to start worrying about everything that has to do with making clothes.
Is that a good thing? I don't think so. You don't see animals wearing clothes, not even on so-called private body parts; they don't hide to have sex, because, really - what's there to hide; and they go just fine.
Thus, by receiving knowledge they didn't need, Adam & Eve sentenced themselves to eternal suffering.

It is questionable whether human is the smarter or the stupider species. Ants build structures much more complex than a human can. These structures can withold during earthquakes, volcano eruptions, or floods. Yet, ants do not go about altering their environment, even though they have the technology and the physical capability. If you think about it, altering their environment is actually a grand act of stupidity, so in that sense humans could very well be less smart than ants...

So how can you claim humans to be smarter species, if you just said they are not doing a good job? All other species do not do anything to harm the environment, so, once again, humans could very well be the stupider species.

You're forgetting that we're a self-proclaimed dominate species. That means, we're only dominate in our own eyes. But not in the eyes of the nature...
You're also forgetting that we have chosen not to be a part of nature by creating civilization and thereby separating oursleves from it. So, technically, since we think we can separate ourselves from our creator, we think that we can exist without it, and we don't take good care of it, 'cause we think it doesn't matter... That is what's happening.

 

I believe we have come to an impasse, you believe there is no good in continuing research into combating disease, I do.
You believe that the actions of one of the most evil men is history were right. I do not.
You believe that keeping the masses ignorant and isolated from the rest of the world is good, I do not.
You believe that a large hive, or a beaver dam, or or a mass of interconnected tunnels built by animals does not construe the "changing of an enviroment", I do.
You believe that because humans are imperfect, we rate below the rest of nature, I do not.
We are are free to choose to believe as we wish, ( a consequence of a free society), I will not change your mind, and neither will you change mine.
Let others read what we have written and decide which path they prefer, or choose a different path altogether.
Peace,