Of course it's not out of your hands. You've just voted. You're saying that people will vote for a candidate because they've already heard they are going to win! Is that stroking your own ego or what? Try voting for the candidate you think is the better political leader.
Males with higher levels of estrogen (what a difficult word to spell) would have lower sex drives andbe less distracted by all the lovely filthy pictures just a couple of clicks away......
"I could finish this programming task or I could...... oh WOW, is that really possible"
Isn't it amazing how accurate George Orwell was when he wrote the book "1984" fifty six years ago. He didn't however foresee the precursive events or threats which would lead to totalitarian government control of civil liberties. Perhaps the catalysts don't matter since the world seems to be increasingly bent on raising walls rather then lowering them. So much for the global village!
What society, existant today, what full-blown society's power-structure isn't based on inequality
Read it again. You make no distinction between the society and the societies power struggle. Why not ??
Power struggles do not supercede trust, respect and reciprocation. If there is a power struggle between siblings or between parents for the affection of a child without these things then it is a family in name only and will collapse as soon as is logistically possible. Communities are based on the same principles I help you sow your fields and later we harvest and you pay me or reciprocate in some way. Larger communities have appropriate checks and balances to enforce this but of course survivalism creeps in. Survivalism has been exceeded by the group ethos but remains nonetheless. Of course survivalism has it's advantages to a degree. For example the space race in the sixties/seventies provided advances in technology and design. The ultimate advantages of achieving the goal however were overshadowed by the need to beat the other guy.
I concede there is inequality in the world but it is not 'necessary' as you say nor is it the basis of civilisation.
You can view it as such. It's a point of view. If you want to feel superior it is because you have an inferiority complex the same way if you go out on Saturday night and want to get into a fight, you will probably find one.
I don't know whether you presume I am a socialist, you wish to show disdain for socialism or what? Economic scarcity theory is continued despite the fact there is no scarcity because of this power struggle, because the people at the top want to stay on top ala Milosovic, Mugabe, Hussein, Chevron, BP. Yes this is the status quo but this is also unenlightened. That's why we're discussing it because we know it is but we know it's not ideal. So what are we going to do about it?? If you wish my ideal political leanings I'd prefer a benevolent dictator. The 'if I ruled the world' idea. I'm damn sure I'd do a better job. That's why I can't wait til the machines take over. Imagine a world run according to pure logic. Of course we'd need some kind of test bed or simulator first. Hmmmmm!!! OK I'm rambling now. Hey don't worry about the family nine-times. You didn't pick 'em. Just have faith in yourself and try to lead by example. I promise you it works.
Later cL0h
Civilization as we know it is founded on poverty.
Taking away poverty, that's a threat to civilization as we know it. (I'm not saying it wouldn't be better, but it wouldn't be civilization as we know it.
You are very different person from me. I feel like I'm talking to an alien.
The UN is not a democracy OK. HAppy now ninetimes I really don't have the time to continue this and I'm sorry if I get testy about it but you seem to be playing devils advocate. I'd love to sit down over a beer and discuss these things. Maybe I can't change the world I live in but I can change how I see it. We do have a choice:) Peace.
Essentially that's not what I'm saying. I never said terrorism was a legitimate recourse.
Let's not get tongue tied here. I know terrorism, drugs, communism, poverty whatever are all abstract nouns. Maybe you cannot call poverty a threat but you cannot wage war on terror. My point was simple: Fighting for peace is like fucking for virginity. It doesn't work.
I know you're trying to be funny but come on.
Can you threaten the world ? Yes I can. "Damn you world! I'm going to kill you." You can say all of these things. You can argue what you want but once in a while take your fingers out of your ears and stop shouting.
I''ve already rebuilt my mothers machine once after being hit by diallers. It now has bang up to date antivirus, AdAware and Spybot latest versions and it's still got a feckin dialler on it. Luckily the phones are on a loop and you have to dial 9 for an outside line which the dialler doesn't do!!
Still very annoying though cos it tries to connect every 60 seconds and the dialup connection dialogue pops up each time.
There is no doubt that those who attend the General Assembly or the Security Council may not have been sent there directly by an electorate. However, in the case of democracies such as Ireland, the country is represented by an ambassador (Richard Ryan) and diplomatic staff, in our case from the Department of Foreign Affairs and usually with a military attaché.
Naturally, the remit of these representatives is defined by the stated policy goals of government and ultimately, all of these staff are answerable in all of their actions to a Minister (Senator)and an Oireachtas (Senate, whatever) whom are elected.
It sounds like maybe you've been listening to politicians too long.
Or maybe my views are represented to some extent at least in the transparent actions of my government. While I don't always agree with domestic decisions I feel my countries foreign policy is broadly in line with my views. We are a neutral country and not a member of NATO and do not support the big stick approach. I suppose because we do not have a big stick.
But equating 'countering terrorism' and 'achieving peace' in my mind WILL NOT WORK. Getting back to my original point. I believe that the pursuit of the tenets laid out by the UN charter and the pursuit of same by democratic means is the only real hope of achieving peace.
The UN Charter of 1945 sets out the aims and powers of the organisation and as you'll be aware, the most important bodies, the Security Council and the General Assembly, work on the basis of consensus (the five permanent members of the Security Council retain a veto) and majority respectively. In that regard, the UN operates, however unsatisfactorily, according to the general precepts of representative democracy. Apropos of the UN's aims, I'd draw your attention to Article 1, which provides that the organisation seeks:
1. To maintain international peace and security, and to that end: to take effective collective measures for the prevention and removal of threats to the peace, and for the suppression of acts of aggression or other breaches of the peace, and to bring about by peaceful means, and in conformity with the principles of justice and international law, adjustment or settlement of international disputes or situations which might lead to a breach of the peace;
2. To develop friendly relations among nations based on respect for the principle of equal rights and self-determination of peoples, and to take other appropriate measures to strengthen universal peace;
3. To achieve international co-operation in solving international problems of an economic, social, cultural, or humanitarian character, and in promoting and encouraging respect for human rights and for fundamental freedoms for all without distinction as to race, sex, language, or religion; and
4. To be a centre for harmonizing the actions of nations in the attainment of these common ends.
It is hard to contend that these provisions are anything but democratic in their explicit and underlying aims.
It is, in fact, completely indifferent toward democratic principles.
The UNs greatest fault is that it cannot enforce democratic agendas. It's members voted not to invade Iraq to look for weapons of mass destruction because a qualified majority did not believe Iraq was harbouring WMDs. The US and Britain acted unilaterally in invading to pursue their own agenda.
1. The UN is an institution based on democratic principles.
2. Kofi Annan is an appointed representative in this institution.
That's what the hell it's supposed to mean.
Since we are talking of democracy, the democratically appointed Kofi Annans opinion surely weighs more than that of the US installed Iyad Allawi. Also at the risk of being modded off topic I'd like to make a genaral statement on international terrorism. Recently a proBush stance by a columnist in my local free rag (Galway, Ireland) attracted a letters page full of rebukes. The columnist in question retaliated by saying that global terrorism is the biggest threat to "the world" today (it's not, poverty is) and that George Bush is the only solution. Well I agree that terrorism is a huge problem but ya know if the British government had listened to the plight of the Catholics in Northern Ireland in the sixties, there would be no IRA today. With aid reconciliation and understanding. Attempts to understand the root causes of support for radicalism ie. war, alienation and poverty are often met with more success then hate. Hate breeds hate. Radical action breeds radical reaction. Stop bombing people into the ground and it just might not happen to you. If you think I'm talking waffle then google 'canary wharf IRA' and compare that with last weekends round of talks where sworn enemies are now sitting around a table to talk. There is a way out and it is not about increased defence spending, unethical imprisonment and unilateral invasion. It is about putting peace before closing your eyes to world suffering. Get informed
And business doesn't have a political stance. ?? Now who's being naive. Ever since laissez faire capitalism was introduced in Britain by Adam Smith politics and business have beeninextricably linked. Governments facilitate getting business done. Business funds government through taxes and often through blatant lobbying
You're running Windows 98 with no virus software. I'm surprised you can use the machine at all. I constantly get requests from people to clean up their Win98 machines. They are usually riddled with spyware, trojans and diallers. Don't bother with new antivirus. Get a new operating system.
As aid You mean like the one million dollars a day given to Israel for state sponsered terrorism against Palestinians. And don't talk to me about defence. I'm Irish. I know what people resort to when their backs are against the wall.
BTW don't the Taleban still owe you guys for all that money you gave them to fight the Russians back in the seventies.
It amazes me that people postulate Murphy's Law in cases like this as if their hands were tied. Despite the fact hat the overwhelming majority of people in the developed world have a basic education there is an incredible lack of basic common sense around.
Try this simple principle When you put you perform a basic function such as locking your stuff in a locker, commit the necessary detail to memory (in this case which finger you use). When you return simply remember which finger you used.
Tada!!!
Slashdot Mirror
Of course it's not out of your hands. You've just voted. You're saying that people will vote for a candidate because they've already heard they are going to win! Is that stroking your own ego or what? Try voting for the candidate you think is the better political leader.
Males with higher levels of estrogen (what a difficult word to spell) would have lower sex drives andbe less distracted by all the lovely filthy pictures just a couple of clicks away......
"I could finish this programming task or I could...... oh WOW, is that really possible"
Isn't it amazing how accurate George Orwell was when he wrote the book "1984" fifty six years ago. He didn't however foresee the precursive events or threats which would lead to totalitarian government control of civil liberties.
Perhaps the catalysts don't matter since the world seems to be increasingly bent on raising walls rather then lowering them.
So much for the global village!
I don't like to brag .
But I can go deeper than that !!
It can change my dashboard just by playing on an XBox.
I have a japanese import. Is it compatible? Does the XBox have to be in the car?
What society, existant today, what full-blown society's power-structure isn't based on inequality
Read it again. You make no distinction between the society and the societies power struggle. Why not ??
Power struggles do not supercede trust, respect and reciprocation. If there is a power struggle between siblings or between parents for the affection of a child without these things then it is a family in name only and will collapse as soon as is logistically possible. Communities are based on the same principles I help you sow your fields and later we harvest and you pay me or reciprocate in some way. Larger communities have appropriate checks and balances to enforce this but of course survivalism creeps in. Survivalism has been exceeded by the group ethos but remains nonetheless.
Of course survivalism has it's advantages to a degree. For example the space race in the sixties/seventies provided advances in technology and design. The ultimate advantages of achieving the goal however were overshadowed by the need to beat the other guy. I concede there is inequality in the world but it is not 'necessary' as you say nor is it the basis of civilisation. You can view it as such. It's a point of view. If you want to feel superior it is because you have an inferiority complex the same way if you go out on Saturday night and want to get into a fight, you will probably find one.
I don't know whether you presume I am a socialist, you wish to show disdain for socialism or what? Economic scarcity theory is continued despite the fact there is no scarcity because of this power struggle, because the people at the top want to stay on top ala Milosovic, Mugabe, Hussein, Chevron, BP. Yes this is the status quo but this is also unenlightened. That's why we're discussing it because we know it is but we know it's not ideal.
So what are we going to do about it?? If you wish my ideal political leanings I'd prefer a benevolent dictator. The 'if I ruled the world' idea. I'm damn sure I'd do a better job. That's why I can't wait til the machines take over. Imagine a world run according to pure logic. Of course we'd need some kind of test bed or simulator first. Hmmmmm!!! OK I'm rambling now.
Hey don't worry about the family nine-times. You didn't pick 'em. Just have faith in yourself and try to lead by example. I promise you it works.
Later
cL0h
Civilization as we know it is founded on poverty.
Taking away poverty, that's a threat to civilization as we know it. (I'm not saying it wouldn't be better, but it wouldn't be civilization as we know it.
You are very different person from me. I feel like I'm talking to an alien.
The UN is not a democracy OK. HAppy now :)
ninetimes I really don't have the time to continue this and I'm sorry if I get testy about it but you seem to be playing devils advocate. I'd love to sit down over a beer and discuss these things. Maybe I can't change the world I live in but I can change how I see it. We do have a choice
Peace.
Essentially that's not what I'm saying. I never said terrorism was a legitimate recourse.
Let's not get tongue tied here. I know terrorism, drugs, communism, poverty whatever are all abstract nouns. Maybe you cannot call poverty a threat but you cannot wage war on terror.
My point was simple: Fighting for peace is like fucking for virginity. It doesn't work.
I know you're trying to be funny but come on.
Can you threaten the world ?
Yes I can. "Damn you world! I'm going to kill you." You can say all of these things. You can argue what you want but once in a while take your fingers out of your ears and stop shouting.
You're calling Ian Paisley and Gerry Adams rational. ??
I''ve already rebuilt my mothers machine once after being hit by diallers. It now has bang up to date antivirus, AdAware and Spybot latest versions and it's still got a feckin dialler on it. Luckily the phones are on a loop and you have to dial 9 for an outside line which the dialler doesn't do!!
Still very annoying though cos it tries to connect every 60 seconds and the dialup connection dialogue pops up each time.
There is no doubt that those who attend the General Assembly or the Security Council may not have been sent there directly by an electorate.
However, in the case of democracies such as Ireland, the country is represented by an ambassador (Richard Ryan) and diplomatic staff, in our case from the Department of Foreign Affairs and usually with a military attaché.
Naturally, the remit of these representatives is defined by the stated policy goals of government and ultimately, all of these staff are answerable in all of their actions to a Minister (Senator)and an Oireachtas (Senate, whatever) whom are elected.
It sounds like maybe you've been listening to politicians too long.
Or maybe my views are represented to some extent at least in the transparent actions of my government. While I don't always agree with domestic decisions I feel my countries foreign policy is broadly in line with my views. We are a neutral country and not a member of NATO and do not support the big stick approach. I suppose because we do not have a big stick. But equating 'countering terrorism' and 'achieving peace' in my mind WILL NOT WORK.
Getting back to my original point. I believe that the pursuit of the tenets laid out by the UN charter and the pursuit of same by democratic means is the only real hope of achieving peace.
The UN Charter of 1945 sets out the aims and powers of the organisation and as you'll be aware, the most important bodies, the Security Council and the General Assembly, work on the basis of consensus (the five permanent members of the Security Council retain a veto) and majority respectively.
In that regard, the UN operates, however unsatisfactorily, according to the general precepts of representative democracy. Apropos of the UN's aims, I'd draw your attention to Article 1, which provides that the organisation seeks:
1. To maintain international peace and security, and to that end: to take effective collective measures for the prevention and removal of threats to the peace, and for the suppression of acts of aggression or other breaches of the peace, and to bring about by peaceful means, and in conformity with the principles of justice and international law, adjustment or settlement of international disputes or situations which might lead to a breach of the peace;
2. To develop friendly relations among nations based on respect for the principle of equal rights and self-determination of peoples, and to take other appropriate measures to strengthen universal peace;
3. To achieve international co-operation in solving international problems of an economic, social, cultural, or humanitarian character, and in promoting and encouraging respect for human rights and for fundamental freedoms for all without distinction as to race, sex, language, or religion; and
4. To be a centre for harmonizing the actions of nations in the attainment of these common ends.
It is hard to contend that these provisions are anything but democratic in their explicit and underlying aims.
It is, in fact, completely indifferent toward democratic principles.
The UNs greatest fault is that it cannot enforce democratic agendas. It's members voted not to invade Iraq to look for weapons of mass destruction because a qualified majority did not believe Iraq was harbouring WMDs. The US and Britain acted unilaterally in invading to pursue their own agenda.
1. The UN is an institution based on democratic principles.
2. Kofi Annan is an appointed representative in this institution.
That's what the hell it's supposed to mean.
Since we are talking of democracy, the democratically appointed Kofi Annans opinion surely weighs more than that of the US installed Iyad Allawi.
Also at the risk of being modded off topic I'd like to make a genaral statement on international terrorism.
Recently a proBush stance by a columnist in my local free rag (Galway, Ireland) attracted a letters page full of rebukes. The columnist in question retaliated by saying that global terrorism is the biggest threat to "the world" today (it's not, poverty is) and that George Bush is the only solution. Well I agree that terrorism is a huge problem but ya know if the British government had listened to the plight of the Catholics in Northern Ireland in the sixties, there would be no IRA today. With aid reconciliation and understanding. Attempts to understand the root causes of support for radicalism ie. war, alienation and poverty are often met with more success then hate.
Hate breeds hate. Radical action breeds radical reaction. Stop bombing people into the ground and it just might not happen to you.
If you think I'm talking waffle then google 'canary wharf IRA' and compare that with last weekends round of talks where sworn enemies are now sitting around a table to talk.
There is a way out and it is not about increased defence spending, unethical imprisonment and unilateral invasion.
It is about putting peace before closing your eyes to world suffering.
Get informed
9 years old and for 9 year olds.
;)
WTF.
What about a no legged slug. Doesn't do much but a lot easier to implement.
(This post sounds like one of our design meetings)
Reportedly he retained some 'trade secret' about the final adjustments of the devices -- and it died with him.
"Eenie meenie miney mo."
click
Nuclear meltdown averted!!
And business doesn't have a political stance. ?? Now who's being naive. Ever since laissez faire capitalism was introduced in Britain by Adam Smith politics and business have beeninextricably linked. Governments facilitate getting business done. Business funds government through taxes and often through blatant lobbying
Wouldn't that be
Electronic Media Festival : Biggest new Arsa.
You're running Windows 98 with no virus software. I'm surprised you can use the machine at all. I constantly get requests from people to clean up their Win98 machines. They are usually riddled with spyware, trojans and diallers. Don't bother with new antivirus. Get a new operating system.
As aid
You mean like the one million dollars a day given to Israel for state sponsered terrorism against Palestinians. And don't talk to me about defence. I'm Irish. I know what people resort to when their backs are against the wall.
BTW don't the Taleban still owe you guys for all that money you gave them to fight the Russians back in the seventies.
It amazes me that people postulate Murphy's Law in cases like this as if their hands were tied. Despite the fact hat the overwhelming majority of people in the developed world have a basic education there is an incredible lack of basic common sense around.
Try this simple principle
When you put you perform a basic function such as locking your stuff in a locker, commit the necessary detail to memory (in this case which finger you use). When you return simply remember which finger you used.
Tada!!!