Sunday, March 29, 2009
Protector
After taking my sweet time in deciding on what to advocate as far as my public advocacy goes, I have decided to side with the Anti-Litter cause. I had a couple of other ideas like, the Endangered Species cause, and the Population Control cause. But especially on the latter cause I figured not that many people would get involved. I choose Anti-Litter because I really dispise litterbugs. There is no reason for littering. We have to take care of our environment and the Earth as best as we possibly can. Otherwise it will fall back on us, when we need it the most. I'm a firm advocate for protecting the environment. And so I will advocate the Anti-Litter cause.
Tuesday, March 17, 2009
R.A.
For those of you who are reading, how many of you have a set religious and/or political affialtion(s). Probably 75 percent or so of you. It’s no myth that many people have some affiliation to a religious or political norm, whether it be republican or democrat, or Catholic or Muslim. But there are always a few in the minority who don’t necessarily have a set affilation to a religious group or a political party. There are those few who have more individuality in those regards. Those few in that minority are usually seen as the eccentric or the outcast, or even the radical. Even so they may be seen as radicals at times, for their outlandish or liberal views, they are usually the ones who make a revolutionary change, or a Kantian turn in modern norms and contemporary schools of thought. These individuals don’t always have to be world renowned even to make a massive change in lives of just a few other individuals. As eccentrically modest it sounds, I like to consider myself among the few and far in between individuals in this category of individualism. I also find it funny that you can in a way try categorizing individuality; anyways, back to the meaning.
Usually political and religious factions will try to coax you into only believing their ‘truths’ over the ‘truths’ of other religious and political factions. So because of this I try to situtate myself on the fringe. If you can take in and learn the ‘truths’ and concepts behind every faction you can start to see the ‘truth’ in all of them. Of course, I’m not trying to beg the question, I’m not saying that there even is a actual ‘truth’. To assume that there was, is to assume that there is only one right path. Which ironically I believe there I more than one right path, more than one right ‘truth’. My childhood religious and political affiliations would have me live a life mediocrity and excruciating monotony. But that’s not my style. They would have you follow tradition instead of encouraging creative freedom.
There are more instances than I can count that I have on occasion been the odd man out in a conversation concerning modern views. People don’t usually have a problem with my liberalism or eccentric nature, but they usually don’t take it seriously. I’m not going to point out any specific instances considering there have been so many. I also don’t want to make any of my theories or ideas the focus of this, simply because that’s not what I’m here to say.
My childhood religious affiliation also wished for the petition of a particular bill in Congress. I’ll withhold the petition’s purpose because it is an extremely touchy subject. Nevertheless, I neglected to say sign the petitiion on the fact that their motives were fundamentally selfish. They weren’t wrong in their motives, but they also weren’t thinking about the big picture. They weren’t thinking about the inevitable consequences from their actions. They believe they are just and right and in their decisions, because it is what’s been programmed into them since more than thousands of years ago. The church sometimes tends to live in the past, thinking that what was good for society back in the day, would still work now. But things change. Ergo they should change with the tide. Sometimes the status quo has to change, whether it be drastic or not, on the grounds that it would be ultimately beneficial for the whole; not just the individual. It’s unfortunate that many people in the surrounding majority tend to be not necessarily ‘brainwashed’, but the seem to be contently deceived by other people’s ideaologies. Of course, that therein begs the question of my validity and sincerity, but I assure you I’m not saying that my way of individuality, going off the beaten path is for everybody. Everyone is different, which is why it makes sense to be true to ourselves. But on the other hand it feels most invigorating and comfortable to be apart of the majority, the conventional group. In my opinion though, I would rather be uncomfortable than follow the rest of the pack.
It may not seem like my message is that clear, but when it comes down to it really is just that clairvoyant. Go your own way. It’s as simple as that. People just need to think for themselves more often. Rather than follow someone else’s preconvictions. That’s what I strive to achieve. That makes me the individual that I am. Just being myself, just being an individual.
Usually political and religious factions will try to coax you into only believing their ‘truths’ over the ‘truths’ of other religious and political factions. So because of this I try to situtate myself on the fringe. If you can take in and learn the ‘truths’ and concepts behind every faction you can start to see the ‘truth’ in all of them. Of course, I’m not trying to beg the question, I’m not saying that there even is a actual ‘truth’. To assume that there was, is to assume that there is only one right path. Which ironically I believe there I more than one right path, more than one right ‘truth’. My childhood religious and political affiliations would have me live a life mediocrity and excruciating monotony. But that’s not my style. They would have you follow tradition instead of encouraging creative freedom.
There are more instances than I can count that I have on occasion been the odd man out in a conversation concerning modern views. People don’t usually have a problem with my liberalism or eccentric nature, but they usually don’t take it seriously. I’m not going to point out any specific instances considering there have been so many. I also don’t want to make any of my theories or ideas the focus of this, simply because that’s not what I’m here to say.
My childhood religious affiliation also wished for the petition of a particular bill in Congress. I’ll withhold the petition’s purpose because it is an extremely touchy subject. Nevertheless, I neglected to say sign the petitiion on the fact that their motives were fundamentally selfish. They weren’t wrong in their motives, but they also weren’t thinking about the big picture. They weren’t thinking about the inevitable consequences from their actions. They believe they are just and right and in their decisions, because it is what’s been programmed into them since more than thousands of years ago. The church sometimes tends to live in the past, thinking that what was good for society back in the day, would still work now. But things change. Ergo they should change with the tide. Sometimes the status quo has to change, whether it be drastic or not, on the grounds that it would be ultimately beneficial for the whole; not just the individual. It’s unfortunate that many people in the surrounding majority tend to be not necessarily ‘brainwashed’, but the seem to be contently deceived by other people’s ideaologies. Of course, that therein begs the question of my validity and sincerity, but I assure you I’m not saying that my way of individuality, going off the beaten path is for everybody. Everyone is different, which is why it makes sense to be true to ourselves. But on the other hand it feels most invigorating and comfortable to be apart of the majority, the conventional group. In my opinion though, I would rather be uncomfortable than follow the rest of the pack.
It may not seem like my message is that clear, but when it comes down to it really is just that clairvoyant. Go your own way. It’s as simple as that. People just need to think for themselves more often. Rather than follow someone else’s preconvictions. That’s what I strive to achieve. That makes me the individual that I am. Just being myself, just being an individual.
Wednesday, March 4, 2009
AUTOE
I myself have particapated in a few public spheres of discourse. I have almost signed a petition for a bill in Congress. I have also voted in the presidential election for 2008. The consequences of these actions vary. Even though minute, they do have an impact, I believe anyways. I think in retrospect I should probably have been more involved. I've come to realize many things over the past couple of years that I never realized before about life in general. One thing is taking action. And that every action truly has a counteraction and a reaction. I think getting involved in one's community is one of the greater achievements that one can hope to strive for.
Wednesday, February 18, 2009
Organized Chaos
Well, ladies and gentlemen; I think it has set its way in stone. Blogging that is. Blogging is a relatively new public sphere that has emerged over time and now spread all over the internet. It’s apparent that it has grown from an underground cult status into a full blown common household public sphere. And it seems to be doing rather well. Part of its success may be do to its journalistic and diary-esque qualities and accessability. Blogging provides a great outlet for individuals and organizations. It’s a great place for a group with a cause to be heard. Blogs are also nice because they don’t discriminate. Anyone can post just about anything they want; their affiliations, their opinions, and their political or religious positions. For example, I recently read the blog of an anarchist. It was nevertheless interesting to say the least.
Anarchy itself is just an interesting and fascinating subject. The author was lucky enough, to be posting on such a great subject. The author portrays themselves, themselves and the anarchist organizations affiliated with the blog, in a somewhat pacifistic manner. Which would be surprising to most people, for they usually see anarchists in a more negative light. But the author does a great job of showing a humanist and peaceful side of anarchism. The author also uses a unique philosophy and set of anarchist/humanist theories that would peak the interest of most.
In this pacifistic fashion the author brings to light a new perspective for people on anarchy, and the problems of the systems of today. The blog adds a certain sense of justice and practicality to anarchy. Of course this is all opinion and personal philosophy. But the author does manage to defend and promote a no-state system of government. I believe anyone who doesn’t have a lot of perspective on politics or anarchy should read this blog especially. It intrigued, informed, and reconfirmed some of my political positions, and my attitude towards anarchy. Anarchy to me is a double edged sword. It sounds good to the ears, but is it really the right way to go? My conclusion on anarchy is that it is either one of two systems; a self-governmental system, or a pure egalitarian democracy. But that’s beside the point.
The subject matter speaks for itself as well. It doesn’t necessarily need an author to write about it. Although a passionate author does help. The emotion and passion evoked in the blog helps ease the tension build up from the intensive material. Many of the stories and anecdotes within the blog, can be very depressing. They usually show a disgusting side of humanity. It’s all there to show that anarchy isn’t what people think it is, and that it is preferable to a well-organized state government or monarchy. The author said in one post that really stuck out at me ,about the conflict in Israel, that; “The attack follows the crippling blockade throughout the supposed ‘ceasefire’, which has destroyed the livelihoods of Gazans, ruined the civilian infrastructure and created a humanitarian disaster which anyone with an ounce of humanity would seek an end to.” (Anarchia 1) A much softer side. From this you can gather that anarchists aren’t as cruel, aggressive, and hateful as most people think they are.
The blog creates a tame, relaxed environment for individuals to just get acquainted with the author and anarchy itself. No matter what your religious or political affiliation, or social status is, this blog will not discriminate. Anyone is welcome to partake in the activities related to the anarchist organizations or the blog. The author and fellow anarchists want people to think for themselves and to create a wide-spread base of informed, hopeful fellow anarchists. Or at least individuals who respect and appreciate anarchism. This blog will not make you hate anarchism, if you are pre-conceived and already slated to one way of thinking though you may want to just open your mind to the message of the blog.
The author’s message is very lucid. It’s that the actions of today’s state and nation governments against their citizens are atrocious. So to defend ourselves we need to dissolve government either completely or just a fraction of their power. Anarchists want the government to at least relinquish a big portion of their control back to the people who created their oppressor in the first place. Anarchy’s motif can be summed up in one statement; “It’s neither one state, nor two states, but no state.” (Anarchia 1) It may sound like a hard pill to swallow, but the theoretical and philosophical concepts behind it make it sound rather enticing.
Whether you like anarchy or a strict capitalist democracy, this blog will educate you in more than one way. Whether you want to learn exactly what anarchy is really all about, or if you just want to get another second or third party opinion on the matter, it’s a great place to start. Just remember if it’s either total anarchy, or democracy, or communism, it’s all just organized chaos.
Works Cited
Zine, Anarchia. No State Solution in Gaza. 2-15-09. 2-18-09 http://anarchia.wordpress.com/.
Anarchy itself is just an interesting and fascinating subject. The author was lucky enough, to be posting on such a great subject. The author portrays themselves, themselves and the anarchist organizations affiliated with the blog, in a somewhat pacifistic manner. Which would be surprising to most people, for they usually see anarchists in a more negative light. But the author does a great job of showing a humanist and peaceful side of anarchism. The author also uses a unique philosophy and set of anarchist/humanist theories that would peak the interest of most.
In this pacifistic fashion the author brings to light a new perspective for people on anarchy, and the problems of the systems of today. The blog adds a certain sense of justice and practicality to anarchy. Of course this is all opinion and personal philosophy. But the author does manage to defend and promote a no-state system of government. I believe anyone who doesn’t have a lot of perspective on politics or anarchy should read this blog especially. It intrigued, informed, and reconfirmed some of my political positions, and my attitude towards anarchy. Anarchy to me is a double edged sword. It sounds good to the ears, but is it really the right way to go? My conclusion on anarchy is that it is either one of two systems; a self-governmental system, or a pure egalitarian democracy. But that’s beside the point.
The subject matter speaks for itself as well. It doesn’t necessarily need an author to write about it. Although a passionate author does help. The emotion and passion evoked in the blog helps ease the tension build up from the intensive material. Many of the stories and anecdotes within the blog, can be very depressing. They usually show a disgusting side of humanity. It’s all there to show that anarchy isn’t what people think it is, and that it is preferable to a well-organized state government or monarchy. The author said in one post that really stuck out at me ,about the conflict in Israel, that; “The attack follows the crippling blockade throughout the supposed ‘ceasefire’, which has destroyed the livelihoods of Gazans, ruined the civilian infrastructure and created a humanitarian disaster which anyone with an ounce of humanity would seek an end to.” (Anarchia 1) A much softer side. From this you can gather that anarchists aren’t as cruel, aggressive, and hateful as most people think they are.
The blog creates a tame, relaxed environment for individuals to just get acquainted with the author and anarchy itself. No matter what your religious or political affiliation, or social status is, this blog will not discriminate. Anyone is welcome to partake in the activities related to the anarchist organizations or the blog. The author and fellow anarchists want people to think for themselves and to create a wide-spread base of informed, hopeful fellow anarchists. Or at least individuals who respect and appreciate anarchism. This blog will not make you hate anarchism, if you are pre-conceived and already slated to one way of thinking though you may want to just open your mind to the message of the blog.
The author’s message is very lucid. It’s that the actions of today’s state and nation governments against their citizens are atrocious. So to defend ourselves we need to dissolve government either completely or just a fraction of their power. Anarchists want the government to at least relinquish a big portion of their control back to the people who created their oppressor in the first place. Anarchy’s motif can be summed up in one statement; “It’s neither one state, nor two states, but no state.” (Anarchia 1) It may sound like a hard pill to swallow, but the theoretical and philosophical concepts behind it make it sound rather enticing.
Whether you like anarchy or a strict capitalist democracy, this blog will educate you in more than one way. Whether you want to learn exactly what anarchy is really all about, or if you just want to get another second or third party opinion on the matter, it’s a great place to start. Just remember if it’s either total anarchy, or democracy, or communism, it’s all just organized chaos.
Works Cited
Zine, Anarchia. No State Solution in Gaza. 2-15-09. 2-18-09 http://anarchia.wordpress.com/.
No Comment
Writers of the blogs that I commented on are as follows,
Englishhhh
Student Christian Fellowship
and Runners and Walkers.
Englishhhh
Student Christian Fellowship
and Runners and Walkers.
Tuesday, February 17, 2009
B.A.D.
Blog Analysis Draft
Well, ladies and gentlemen; I think it has set its way in stone. Blogging that is. Blogging is a relatively new public sphere that has emerged over time and now spread all over the internet. It’s apparent that it has grown from an underground cult status into a full blown common household public sphere. And it seems to be doing rather well. Part of its success may be do to its journalistic and diary-esque qualities. Blogging provides a great outlet for individuals and organizations. It’s a great place for a group with a cause to be heard. Blogs are also nice because they don’t discriminate. Anyone can post just about anything they want; their affiliations, their opinions, and their political or religious positions. For example, I recently read the blog of an anarchist. It was nevertheless interesting to say the least.
Anarchy itself is just an interesting and fascinating subject. The author was lucky enough, to be posting on such a great subject. The author portrays themselves, themselves and the anarchist organizations affiliated with the blog, in a somewhat pacifistic manner. Which would be surprising to most people, for they usually see anarchists in a more negative light. But the author does a great job of showing a humanist and peaceful side of anarchism. The author also uses a unique philosophy and set of anarchist/humanist theories that would peak the interest of most.
In this pacifistic fashion the author brings to light a new perspective for people on anarchy, and the problems of the systems of today. The blog adds a certain sense of justice and practicality to anarchy. Of course this is all opinion and personal philosophy. But the author does manage to defend and promote a no-state system of government. I believe anyone who doesn’t have a lot of perspective on politics or anarchy should read this blog especially. It intrigued, informed, and reconfirmed some of my political positions, and my attitude towards anarchy. Anarchy to me is a double edged sword. It sounds good to the ears, but is it really the right way to go? My conclusion on anarchy is that it is either one of two systems; a self-governmental system, or a pure egalitarian democracy. But that’s beside the point.
The subject matter speaks for itself as well. It doesn’t necessarily need an author to write about it. Although a passionate author does help. The emotion and passion evoked in the blog helps ease the tension build up from the intensive material. Many of the stories and anecdotes within the blog, can be very depressing. They usually show a disgusting side of humanity. It’s all there to show that anarchy isn’t what people think it is, and that it is preferable to a well-organized state government or monarchy. The author said in one post that really stuck out at me ,about the conflict in Israel, that; “The attack follows the crippling blockade throughout the supposed ‘ceasefire’, which has destroyed the livelihoods of Gazans, ruined the civilian infrastructure and created a humanitarian disaster which anyone with an ounce of humanity would seek an end to.” () A much softer side. From this you can gather that anarchists aren’t as cruel, aggressive, and hateful as most people think they are.
The blog creates a tame, relaxed environment for individuals to just get acquainted with the author and anarchy itself. No matter what your religious or political affiliation, or social status is, this blog will not discriminate. Anyone is welcome to partake in the activities related to the anarchist organizations or the blog. The author and fellow anarchists want people to think for themselves and to create a wide-spread base of informed, hopeful fellow anarchists. Or at least individuals who respect and appreciate anarchism. This blog will not make you hate anarchism, if you are pre-conceived and slated to one way of thinking though you may want to just open your mind to the message of the blog.
The author’s message is very lucid. It’s that the actions of today’s state and nation governments against their citizens are atrocious. So to defend ourselves we need to dissolve government either completely or just a fraction of their power. Anarchists want the government to at least relinquish a big portion of their control back to the people who created their oppressor in the first place. Anarchy’s motif can be summed up in one statement; “It’s neither one state, nor two states, but no state.” () It may sound like a hard pill to swallow, but the theoretical and philosophical concepts behind make it sound rather enticing.
Well, ladies and gentlemen; I think it has set its way in stone. Blogging that is. Blogging is a relatively new public sphere that has emerged over time and now spread all over the internet. It’s apparent that it has grown from an underground cult status into a full blown common household public sphere. And it seems to be doing rather well. Part of its success may be do to its journalistic and diary-esque qualities. Blogging provides a great outlet for individuals and organizations. It’s a great place for a group with a cause to be heard. Blogs are also nice because they don’t discriminate. Anyone can post just about anything they want; their affiliations, their opinions, and their political or religious positions. For example, I recently read the blog of an anarchist. It was nevertheless interesting to say the least.
Anarchy itself is just an interesting and fascinating subject. The author was lucky enough, to be posting on such a great subject. The author portrays themselves, themselves and the anarchist organizations affiliated with the blog, in a somewhat pacifistic manner. Which would be surprising to most people, for they usually see anarchists in a more negative light. But the author does a great job of showing a humanist and peaceful side of anarchism. The author also uses a unique philosophy and set of anarchist/humanist theories that would peak the interest of most.
In this pacifistic fashion the author brings to light a new perspective for people on anarchy, and the problems of the systems of today. The blog adds a certain sense of justice and practicality to anarchy. Of course this is all opinion and personal philosophy. But the author does manage to defend and promote a no-state system of government. I believe anyone who doesn’t have a lot of perspective on politics or anarchy should read this blog especially. It intrigued, informed, and reconfirmed some of my political positions, and my attitude towards anarchy. Anarchy to me is a double edged sword. It sounds good to the ears, but is it really the right way to go? My conclusion on anarchy is that it is either one of two systems; a self-governmental system, or a pure egalitarian democracy. But that’s beside the point.
The subject matter speaks for itself as well. It doesn’t necessarily need an author to write about it. Although a passionate author does help. The emotion and passion evoked in the blog helps ease the tension build up from the intensive material. Many of the stories and anecdotes within the blog, can be very depressing. They usually show a disgusting side of humanity. It’s all there to show that anarchy isn’t what people think it is, and that it is preferable to a well-organized state government or monarchy. The author said in one post that really stuck out at me ,about the conflict in Israel, that; “The attack follows the crippling blockade throughout the supposed ‘ceasefire’, which has destroyed the livelihoods of Gazans, ruined the civilian infrastructure and created a humanitarian disaster which anyone with an ounce of humanity would seek an end to.” () A much softer side. From this you can gather that anarchists aren’t as cruel, aggressive, and hateful as most people think they are.
The blog creates a tame, relaxed environment for individuals to just get acquainted with the author and anarchy itself. No matter what your religious or political affiliation, or social status is, this blog will not discriminate. Anyone is welcome to partake in the activities related to the anarchist organizations or the blog. The author and fellow anarchists want people to think for themselves and to create a wide-spread base of informed, hopeful fellow anarchists. Or at least individuals who respect and appreciate anarchism. This blog will not make you hate anarchism, if you are pre-conceived and slated to one way of thinking though you may want to just open your mind to the message of the blog.
The author’s message is very lucid. It’s that the actions of today’s state and nation governments against their citizens are atrocious. So to defend ourselves we need to dissolve government either completely or just a fraction of their power. Anarchists want the government to at least relinquish a big portion of their control back to the people who created their oppressor in the first place. Anarchy’s motif can be summed up in one statement; “It’s neither one state, nor two states, but no state.” () It may sound like a hard pill to swallow, but the theoretical and philosophical concepts behind make it sound rather enticing.
Saturday, February 14, 2009
To What I May Concern
I am concerned and interested in many things. Some of the more important ones are the environment, treatment of animals, and various political, religious and philosophical issues. I find myself most concerned with our ethics as people. All these things and more are incredibly important to me.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)