"Who cares?"

Post Reply New Topic

I'm not suggesting we beat ourselves up, but I don't think we should be overlooking or ignoring the suffering while we pat ourselves on the back for certain instances of perceived progress.

I agree that it's less of a 'system' thing and more of a 'human' thing. However the systems are created by the humans. There's a cause and effect relationship.

I find an inconsistency in the phrase "to cry over an ever declining brutality". The brutality might be declining but the term itself suggests something definitely worth crying over. Would you tell those suffering in war-torn countries, or suffering from hunger and disease that they don't need to cry because there are other places in the world that are suffering much less than they are?

The best way to quote portions of text is to click drag select the range you want, then above this reply text area you wil see a button with little lines.. looks like a farmers field sort of. It is to the left of the youtube button. Press that when you have selected text and it will wrap it in quote marks. Often what i do is remove the quote codes created by the reply and set them up in pieces as I choose.

back on topic.

Lets be clear on one thing, and history documents this pretty well: For only a scant 36 years were they ever free of external domination. For not even four decades did they have anything resembling freedom. And that short period was only a grace granted through apathy and distraction. When China looked away, nobody else marched in because only China really wants Tibet.

Now communist China has (re)dominated them for twice as long as they were ever "free". At some point, autonomy is lost. You dont have to lose your culture when you lose your autonomy(Quebec in Canada), and you can lose your culture and retain your autonomy(Canada as influenced by America).

Tibet has no autonomy and not all the wishful thinking in the world will change that.

So where do you get this baffling notion that they'll retain some illusive state of nationhood forever? Or that they ever had it? Prior to 1900 they were a small mountainous society controlled exactly the same way as China.. by warlords. Their technology was the same(or less). As for their religion, They are culturally smeared in with India.

As for the Rom, at no point in their history were they ever universally accepted. So for even one country to recognise them is a step forward, a gain. Zero + one = one. Thats addition, right? Tahts a step ahead. I dont see how you can argue it.

Did some reading:



So there you go. That is far more than one country. Is it progress yet?

I think SporadSpartan said it best. Kudos to you for putting AG in his place. haha
He is top dog here, so it's funny when a new girl challenges him.

One step is not really enough for a celebration. The so-called victory of the blacks in the USA still leaves a totally unacceptable number of black people without work, in prisons, badly educated and without sufficient basics such as food and proper medical care. That they can walk in the front door of a restaurant is hardly compensation. That a black president takes over the same politics and economics of Bush is insulting.

Hi Fuzzy, thanks for the instructions to do with quoting but there's still a problem - I can't click and drag because this is one of those laptop things. And the rest of it doesn't make sense, but when I've got more patience I'll experiment the 'inner workings of the quotations' and hopefully be able to master it! lol

Back on topic (just for the heck of it!) - the political history of Tibet is irrelevant because the fact remains that Tibetans have been 'free' to exercise their own culture and religion for centuries as evidenced by the long succession of lamas who existed there and practised there and were never forced to actually FLEE from there until occupation in 1959. And many of them can't return to even visit their families still to this day because the threat of persecution still exists.

Quebec in Canada may have retained their culture despite a loss of autonomy but there is no pervasion when you consider a group of people who are at risk of being killed for trying to retain theirs. And yes the Tibetan religion of buddhism has its origins in India - but again, the point is that they are not FREE to practise it.

And as for the EU Roma Summit - yes let's all rejoice that discussions were held and awareness of their plight was raised. But I can't actually go 'Woop-Dee-Doo' until it becomes evident that real change has occurred for them as a result of these talks. Until then it's just 'all talk'.

And as for your mathematics you've overlooked the fact that we're not starting at zero. Before the 'progress' of Switzerland the number of countries accepting of the Rom were in the negatives. Let's just say it's negative 10 (because I don't know the exact number so thought I'd use a low number to appear more optimistic!) So that's -10 + 1 = -9. Yes it might be progress, but we're not actually talking positive numbers yet.

I'm not pessimistic despite how it might come across on this issue. My basic stance is that the world is and always has been constantly changing. Progress is not necessarily reliable. Take for example a man whose life is going successfully and happily - he loves his family and his job and is in good health. He regards himself as happy. Then one day he is badly injured in a car accident and due to his injuries loses all of it. This can happen at any time to anyone. There is nothing to be trusted in our gains. I prefer to observe how things really are - appreciate the good and be mindful of the bad. By assuming certain outcomes will occur either on a world-scale or an individual-scale is unrealistic given how many unexpected factors are at play.

Just thought it was necessary to clarify my sum and why I couldn't begin at zero.

I'd consider 'zero' as a place of neutrality. The negative numbers indicate persecution. The positive numbers indicate acceptance.

EDIT: I apologise if this is abstract but I just can't bring myself to agree that the situation for the Rom is positive when persecution still exists for them. Just. Can't. Do. It.

i would like people to stop thinking they know what god "said" therefore they must live by what "god" said and give it a green light to persecute others who dont fall inline with what they think "god" said

thats alot of said and if your sick of it then religion should make you vomit

Yeah I find it difficult to comprehend how anyone could disagree with your first sentence (the one with all the saids!).

However your second statement becomes rather sweeping when you consider that there are certain religions, and certain religious practitioners who don't persecute others with the misguided belief that it's serving a higher purpose to do so. Furthermore I am open to what I perceive to be a real benefit that can be gained through religion for certain types of people who have this inclination.