Things We Should Talk About

Or: Postmodern Society Issues

This post has been a long time coming. Let me begin with that. 

As a person attempting to gain a wider perspective, I obviously began with my own, new experiences, relevant to my question, and then thought on experiences exposed in snippets of conversation from family and friends, and then searched the internet with more questions.

Still interested?

All right, then. My question – began with thoughts on whether or not it was a clever idea to collectively not teach or perhaps better worded: decide, to collectively not teach, people about religion. As in the ‘main five’ religions/faiths. Now, don’t get me wrong – there is nothing wrong with not being of a religion. In fact I should say the main ‘seven’ faiths(atheism and agnosticism included); because my learnt definition of a religion is that which affects a person’s morals, belief-system/main belief, what they think about the world and their place in it. That is their faith; their religion; their body(School?)-of-thought. In fact, being honest- I am Hindu, but I am also a believer of Science, of rationality, of psychology (not Scientology though)…

Back on-point: was it smart? Why would a society choose to do this? What was gained? What was lost? To me, as a person, I felt that this was dangerous and disagreed for a number of reasons. To deny a person knowledge means they can’t make informed decisions, yes? To have knowledge is not a bad thing. It is a good thing- an example being that people by nature/habit, seem to be afraid of things we know nothing/rumours about, right? Fear of the unknown, for example, was something played upon a lot in the Gothic genre, and made it quite the hit – even now, because some of those societal fears of the unknown, still are. 

Another thing that happens when people are scared/unknowing, is that they feel like they can’t empathise, or sympathise; looking at it that way, tell me how that wouldn’t alienate (which has been observed in children, in adults, in workplaces, in society – historically, there was a progression something like this in England, for example: gender -women could not work, they were objects in the household, the weaker sex, seen and not heard-, age -children and the old-, race – one by one as people came over- and then sexual orientation – gay, lesbian, bisexual, and then gender identity – and none of them have completely gone away). So, can you honestly consider the merits and demerits of education -this time religious/faith-based and therefore somewhat cultural ignorance, not causing alienation or a rise in anxiety and tensions in a multi-cultural society when there are issues from a specific label elsewhere in the world?

As opposed to societies that have taught and explained these things, that can then squabble and debate and talk about what they think without everyone getting up-in-arms about it. Yes, sometimes when talking you have to be considerate and careful not to be crass, or harsh – unless the latter you mean- but that’s because you can be harmful otherwise. We can still talk about problems elsewhere and not be defensive, or break into labels-of-origin. I do not look at a problem in the news, turn to my flat mates for example and think ‘oh, that one is Made in China’ or ‘India’ or ‘Dubai’ and think I can not ask – can not bring up this issue, these questions because I will be faced with nationalism/fascism/self-righteous anger/beliefs. No, I honestly do not have these worries. Because we are a step away from these scenarios; this is our home, our people are here – and yes, the people over there are ours too, in a sense, but why be angry someone is curious, seeking out knowledge, to learn, to self-educate? This is encouraged.

 

Do you see why I find such an inverse of culture so horrendous? It’s potential for self harm – in the face of a world that encourages increasingly, education, how can ignorance help? Think: if this was about sex education, would you encourage that not knowing about sex would act as a deterrent for sex? Or sexual diseases? No. So why is the same reasoning applied in America (And wherever else – parts of the UK, seem to think it’s not important to teach about other religions). How can you understand other people, or feel comfortable in other countries if you have no basis for how to treat them respectfully and vice versa? In my perception, all this is achieving in (my opinion again- correct me if you know better, suggest for other ideas) attempting to fight religious extremism, is making people more susceptible to it – or vulnerable to scaremongering/hate/prejudice.

To give you an example, I had a friend whom honestly had no idea about any religion other than Christianity -she wanted to know what the others were like, because she was aware how unaware, how lacking, she was- and how unable to cope with or behave with other people, and she felt awkward. So I explained as best I could – starting with basic information on how to generally not insult anyone, and we eventually worked our way up to other aspects of other religions, because she was so fascinated. But that did not change her beliefs; it helped her understand others. How can understanding be bad?

There are so many more arguments I can make for why it makes sense to educate – or offer education on these subjects- and on how uneasy the idea makes me; I can make allusions to communism, and selective-teaching, and how this could be an attempt on socially engineering society, but I think this would go on too long as a post.

I had more thoughts and questions on this topic, but I feel this is a good place to stop. If you have any questions, please feel free to comment/share!

Continue reading

Advertisements

A poem from the future

Just listened to the intonation of the sounds of the words that fill this poem…imagining all it describes. It’s -I have not an accurate word for it, but it is good, amusing and serious at times, it rhymes and tells a good set of points.

In short I love it 🙂

ideas.ted.com

Editor’s note: This poem kicks off a new “Question Worth Asking” series: “How weird will the future be?” First up: a piece from poet and TED Fellow Ben Burke.

[Dear Helen- So sorry. Didn’t have time to write that poem. But my future self sent me one yesterday. So we’re good. Crazy, right? It’s totally legit and actually from the future, so no need to double-check, you’re probably too busy anyway. Happy New Year!  – Ben Burke]

Edited_RECORDER

THE TRANSHUMANIST’S LAMENT
or
TOO MANY RIVERS, NOT ENOUGH LAKES
or
OH, FUTURE — YOU SO CRAZY

I arrived in the basket that was weaved here before me
And I stayed in any place with a roof that would store me
I have lots of belongings
But didn’t pack for the trip
I got here, they put pants on me
And then the world gave me the slip

I’ve lived as slowly as…

View original post 1,168 more words

Federalization of the internet and wordpress

Just read this and holy wow. That’s potentially Bad News, for the idea of the internet- finding information on things (like the news in your area or the world from different places in the world on one topic- I myself am in the UK)! I imagine the lack of reaction might just be a hush hush attitude and manner.

Re-blogging this(Hope it goes viral. How is this lack of knowing-what-we’re-voting-for helping?! Plausible deniability, maybe..)

Pete's Alaska

P.1On February 26th the FCC will rule on a 332 page bill submitted by the President that regulates the internet, wherein it states ???? Oh did I forget to mention that the contents are secret until after the vote by the FCC. This reminds me of what Nancy Pelosi said about oboma-care that we must pass the bill before we can see whats in the bill. I believe the internet has done a fair job of regulating itself so far so why does oboma want a new set of federal regulations and have those rules enforced by the FCC?

Today on the radio a member of the FCC’s voting board was on the air talking about how outside regulation would only mean increases in the price of internet access. He spoke in generalities because of the ‘gag order’ in place but did mention that these regulations would deal with allocation…

View original post 265 more words

On Multi-Culture, (buying:) the Charlie Hebdo Response, Extremist Attacks, Japan and the Burka Ban?

Hi! It’s been awhile. [Edit: I’m hoping that if I post this here, it will encourage me to convey the developing argument I was not-unfortunately- able to transcribe quickly enough. Starting to think I should carry a tape recorder around, speak and then write it out here! 11/03/15]

Caught a snippet on the recent-most update and new extremist attack on BBC ONE News, before I was Google searching about this ‘Charlie Hebdo’ magazine.

My response to the post (or specifically, a comment or three in response to it):

Yes, I understand and respect where Japan’s coming from. They are being very mature.
But I think this has become something where buying the magazine itself is symbolic now as a response to the terrorist (No; I change that word, to give a name such power, such dignity, fear-inspiring or otherwise, is remiss of me) extremist attacks sparked by the magazine(but starting in France- perhaps from the Burka Ban?). Meaning that tensions in these countries were rising-and had been possibly for years-, and this magazine was the final straw (for the Muslim extremist side). They’re angry, and that’s fine- they can go critic this -I’m sure there are plenty with either the umph in position of job or name amongst work or friends and family, or then resourceful (…or young, let’s be honest) enough to use social media to ‘boo’ it or give it a ‘ 😦 ‘-or make a genuine argument on how they’re being attacked.
BUT.
The idea is that yes it’s disrespectful, and rude maybe, and totally making fun of a specified faith…but in these countries? EVERYONE is made fun of, at one point or another, and anyone has the right to do this at anytime: if the author had gone on all sorts of channels (TV, radio, magazine, speeches, ect) with all sorts of DIFFERENT projects making fun of ONE target (so, specifically making fun and spending all his alloted time/business doing this only), THEN it would be a problem. But it wasn’t. It was just the one, magazine.

——————– I’m going to continue this later (points: free will, freedom of speech- BBC ONE News confirmed ;), personal a tad also- extremist situs in france, threat in gmany, built up for America and UK: multitude of reasons, mostly NOT because they’re specifically being hateful to Muslims ergo are racist or/religion-ist, but just offended that this…this…irresponsibility, this irrationality(cases looked for to find where a culminated co-ordinated effort to say they don’t like it, on the internet here: if any), this righteous-indignant-prideful anger, which is hurting so many. I understand this. But what do they hope to accomplish? It makes it harder for muslims NOT with that attitude (Mosques holding sermons ‘to bring communities together’ and I can’t help but wonder and think : all the community or just Muslims? Because just muslims could withraw them from society whose response so far as we know is NOT aggressive-antagonistic, but cutting off could spark anger? Shouldn’t you be trying both…depending how this situ swings, JUST muslims may cause a problem…otherwise its difficult for them to see it as anything other than an attack and ignore and like the WHOLE SITUATION has the potential to spark imbittered fighting and antagonise the seams of that part of society. Which is not cool: I have a point to make, here, if these people can’t control themselves? Why shouldn’t these threatned countries throw anyone out. They’re being endangered and so tolerant. But if it becomes too dangerous, it doubles and redoubles the chances of someone in power deciding lets do this. They don’t have to keep people who’ve got those attitudes. For the rest, I’m sorry, grit your teeth and whispher to family/friends if you know some to tell them to stop attacks, otherwise you’ll probably have to put up with it more..atleast. Atleast this response is not an act of violence. If there’s a ripple-effect of racist acts and words, speak up, but I doubt it.).

Also there’s the political aspect: countries have their fingers in the pies of oil, saudi arabia (with their corrupt/mostly corrupt guys -name- who deem law wherever they go- where this whipping is happening which could be another reason for this response and anger FOR this guy), most countries WEST stopped buying their oil (because the only reason they’re so rich in this case is because of oil that WEST wanted; stop for years, and it will no longer be rich or powerful via boycott); america’s foothold usage of S-A to attack EastAsia *I say america and mean the gov and politicians; if I say american PEOPLE I mean them. otherwise no.

Ukraine Update

Hi!

 

I’ll post up the older and written out posts concerning Russia and Ukraine (and predictions) when I have more time, I promise. For the mean time, however, there’s this:

 

Ukraine, in a recent (1 minute ago) news update, showed broken down buildings, a mysterious crater (evidence of a small-scale missile, perhaps?) and speculations on how long the brave, eccentric but competant army-people SEPARATISTS will be able to hold out against Russia. Speculations on how there seems to be ‘an air of resignation’ about the place, that they’ll fight til the end.

 

And mentioning of the Russian-elected (UNLAWFULLY) leader of the force to invade   sorry (except not really) ‘occupy’ Ukraine, resigning and being replaced by another. Perhaps due to his failure to Immediately Join Ukraine With Mother Russia? Eventhough, you know (or you  history-lovers will, anyway), Ukraine is kindof maybe importantly part of something called the ‘push barrier’ (I think; for some reason I forget this term from time to time. It accounts for all the neutral lands i.e. Poland, Ukraine in between Russia and the West- that no one takes over or breaches as it’s the protective layer that ensures no war or take overs. Hence, if anyone tries to breach it….the other non-trusting side will see, see?).

Hitler-walking-over-the-Spineless-Leaders-of-Democracy-by-British-cartoonist-David-Low Putin 0225toonwasserman.r

I just hope no policy of appeasement is followed for Putin  the leader of Russia. Because it worked so well for Hitler, right? Oh wait. It didn’t.

 

As my old History Teacher taught me (one of many viewpoints):

 

What was wrong with appeasement?

Put bluntly:

  • “It rewarded and encouraged bullying, aggressive behaviour.
  • Hitler was untrustworthy.
  • Germany & Hitler grew stronger.
  • USSR were alienated from western allies.”

Replace Germany and Hitler with….you know.

Putin-Stalin_2

[Not my image: DISCLAIMED. Google search this?]

Also, I can’t remember right now (it has been a long day today, alright?)- but Putin openly did something that, when I witnessed on the news, I was sure would be a declaration of war. All but. Scary moment, that. Also, I should probably mention the so-called punitive(right word here?) punishment on Russians all over thanks to…whomever was attempting to ‘punish’ or discourage Putin. Bad idea, all I’m going to say.

Putin Ukraine 4

DISCLAIMED! Says: “PUTIN! STOP! COME BACK HERE OR I’LL BE FORCED TO DRAFT A STRONGLY WORDED CONDEMNATION!”

Also, maybe they should consider nipping this thing in the bud, whilst they can? It looks like it’ll be a fight either way, and this way, no real land and consequently forces have been gained (And people harmed/therefore lost).

DISCLAIMER: Not mine, found it on the internet. I'm sure if you drag this into google, you'll find who drew this epicness.

DISCLAIMER: Not mine, found it on the internet. I’m sure if you drag this into google, you’ll find who drew this epicness.

Just sayin’. Should’ve been done with Hitler; World War Two could’ve been, like, the battle of Germany-Rhineland and The Big Three. Or something similar.

For goodness sakes- put it down, and put it down hard.

Or darnwell get tacticle (like..ninjas…) and retrain troops better. and make the police have more pride and motivation on the home-front whilst you’re at it, World. Here in the UK they need some revving up. Not constant attacks, you know? Not good for anyone’s confidence or sense of camaraderie. Also, it’s bad that soldiers give…important parts of themselves -sometimes again and again- only to come home and be unsafe. So, yeah. Help the Police here in the UK too please.

(INSPIRE YOURSELF BY BLUE BLOODS. No, not the same- make it your own! But see how it’s worked elsewhere.)

Geez. If only.

Nami, OUT!