Do you mean this one thing or something of that general horrendous nature? What if it's black men being hung for being black? Obviously in all of these cases, the people responsible are going to have the best psychologists and marketing agencies and lobbying firms helping them to deny it so there will always be the BS like "oh things DO need to change but things take time and we need to educate the population bla bla bla". There's never ever been anything that blatant. Even in countries where they're hanging women for adultery, they have a cultural or religious bs excuse for doing it. No one is ever going out there pumping their fists and celebrating hanging women.
What's a legitimate cause? Hmmm, I'm confused about whether to view the general response in this thread as: "There's basically nothing unless the president marries off 15 year old girls on national tv" or Is there really just nothing that can engender a greater response from you than tweeting about it? A legitimate cause seems to be the general vague answer, which typically means nothing at all given what's possible through information secrecy, media influence and political lobbying. There must be something for each person though. What if a tape leaked (obviously I know this is not likely or realistic) showing Obama saying he doesn't care if black people are being shot as long as the TPP gets through? What if it turned out Hillary has a private bank account somewhere and rich foreigners were flooding it with money to buy influence (and of course, that comes with a public denial and suppression of investigation because of legal loopholes)? That's not to say evidence = proof, but the reality is there not much a person with that much power, money and influence can't at least distort or erase. I guess my convoluted question is... has your criteria for demanding change more forcefully become obsolete? With this pendulum-like state of affairs, if you're being honest with yourself, are you saying there is nothing that is important enough and realistically identifiable that would make you value it over your self? What also triggered these questions for me is that I was reading something about GMO foods, a subject I know very little about at this moment. There was a really striking description of the American debate on the subject: there are virtually no Americans who do not want their food to clearly be labelled as GMO or non-GMO. The only reason this is taking time to become a standard is because (according to what I read) GMO companies pay a lot of money to lawyers, lobbyists and marketers to make it so. But what's really striking to me - and this is a commentary on humans rather than America - if virtually all of us agree on something and the legal process to get it approved is say a year long - shouldn't we all be in the streets after about two years with something that can so directly affect our well-being? Just some thoughts I guess. Since no one seems to be reading except my stalker, maybe I'll pour some more thoughts out. The feeling of being alone is something a lot of historical figures I admire have written about. That feeling that no one gives a ****, and even if they did they wouldn't put any effort into helping you achieve it. So should I care? There are some issues where if I did anything about it, I would be murdered instantly, while in Western countries (the countries which claim to share these values most) no one will even interrupt their daily Justin Bieber report to even hear about these things. Would anyone on this board step onto a street if I was murdered for something THEY objectively believe in? It would not even make it to the media you guys watch, so how would you even know. Then I think, who would I be if I followed these ideas that I hate so much? What would be the discussion here if my primary interest in politics was a country's utter military dominance of all others? If I ignored all the wrongdoing that's being done to Americans because it's not "my" country or people of "my" nationality? If my understanding of Christianity or atheism or agnosticism or Judaism did not stretch beyond the crusades and just certain hateful rhetoric? If my approach to society and community was to get mine and everyone else can just fend for themselves because I want that new ultra hd and I want to become a CEO of someone's company? If the only stories I cared about in America were those about people who share my nationality being harmed? Why do my wife and I talk about how Americans need to take their country back from these corporations and need another MLK? Should I support friendships between powerful people here and the powerful Americans that are hurting Americans the most? I don't know man. Don't know why I'm even blabbing about this. I've watched my friends turn into that. Turn into people who put symbols above people, especially with conscription n all. Become suspicious of everyone else, become less culturally educated. They're turning that corner. From reading about American history, I imagine those of you who are in their 50's and 60's will know what I'm talking about. America was a different place in the 70's but that wasn't profitable and it didn't serve certain interests. But for humans, it was probably a better place, a better time. By writing all this I guess I've reached another conclusion. I guess I'm bidding farewell to my open pacifism. It was never welcome there and it's no longer welcome here. At one time it was marginalized, but today seen as a threat. I had a dream they came for me because I wouldn't say I was a pacifist. That scared the hell out of me man. Maybe my parents were right. If people would do it for you, then do it for them. I still disagree with that thought, but you guys make it way too easy to fold. /end blabbing session
