<p>The 6th was the anniversary of the bombing of Hiroshima. Yesterday was Nagasaki. I've been reading about "peace rallies" held to honor the occasion.</p>
<p>SO what do y'all think? To tell the truth, I don't understand what the "peace rallies" are hoping to accomplish. How is standing around a "peace pole" in a silent vigil going to do anything to bring peace to the world? What are some things that CAN help bring peace to the world?</p>
<p>Apparently nobody cares. Explains a lot…</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>There are a lot more of those events; vigils include those honoring 9/11, the Holocaust, etc. I’m not going to comment on the rest.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Your question is not phrased in a fashion that makes it appealing to answer.</p>
<p>Did yall hear about that one dude who survived Hiroshima and then decided to bike down to Nagasaki to see his family? He survived both times O_O</p>
<p>No, I don’t think they do anything to be honest. </p>
<p>My ideas for peace are unpopular to say the least. But here are some ideas: </p>
<p>-Move past religion/trying to convert people. Many of the worst atrocities in history have been because of religion. Religious/ideological conflicts continue to be one of the causes for much of the violence in the world.</p>
<p>-Lower the population. More people = more famine and need = more social upheaval because people are starving. This could be done by increasing contraception to the whole world and by governments giving their people incentives to have fewer children. </p>
<p>-Close the gap between the rich and poor in the world. The less of a gap between rich and poor in a country, the less conflicts they are involved in. </p>
<p>-America needs to leave other countries alone. We are responsible for much of the violence in Mexico, the Middle East, and Africa. We are not the world’s policemen and we need to focus on our own issues, NOT on creating issues for other countries. </p>
<p>Meh. You asked.</p>
<p>@ksar: I understand honoring the victims. It’s the “peace” stuff I don’t get. Wouldn’t it be better to put up a war memorial remembering the victims than a monument to some nebulous “peace”? And yeah, I didn’t do a very good job with the question.</p>
<p>@romani: Well, you know my views on #1. I question how to do #2 and #3 without creating worse problems. I agree with #4, or at least with the “leave them alone”. Not so sure about “it’s all our fault”.</p>
<p>Everyone is in peace when they’re dead. Therefore, the only logical way to achieve peace is to kill everyone. I have dedicated my life to this goal.</p>
<p>
Most violence “because of religion” entails the use of religion as an excuse, not a root cause.</p>
<p>
The Earth can support up to 8 billion, with more equal distribution of resources. I think that would be preferable to “lowering” the population.</p>
<p>
There is no war but class war. This is no struggle but class struggle. I like this idea.</p>
<p>
Depends. Lying to the world and invading a country over it isn’t exactly the best thing we can do. However, there are instances in which injustice is so great that intervention is needed. When there is something greatly wrong, those with the ability to do something about it have the responsibility to do something about it.</p>
<p>Personally, I think your third suggestion is just great, and would do a world of good in bringing about justice and peace. And remember, “Peace is not just the absence of violence, it is the presence of justice.”</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Mine are probably more unpopular: disband the United States and form a number of independent communes run directly by the people (not a representative democracy, a direct one), none of them with borders. This would hopefully eliminate the possibility of dictatorship and make questions of illegal immigration moot.</p>
<p>^
</p>
<p>yay! We now have over one liberal socialist for the first time since that communism thread</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Is there any support of this? We’re under that mark right now and the earth isn’t doing a great job of holding all of us as it is.</p>
<p>And your last remark reminded me of one I forgot:
-Equal rights and justice for everyone, regardless of age, gender, sexual orientation, etc. Of course within reason (obviously a 10 year old shouldn’t drive because a 20 year old can… you get my point). Countries that are more “equal” also have less conflicts.</p>
<p>@religion- there is no proof that it is an excuse rather than a cause. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I’ll concede slightly. Obviously the Holocaust should have been stopped. However, we had a majority of support in the world. Perhaps the threshold should be how much of the world’s support we have. <em>shrug</em></p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Erm… hi. Have we met? If you’ve ever read any of my political posts, it’s pretty obvious that I’m a liberal socialist :p</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I’m not sure why, but that made me laugh my ass off :)</p>
<p>
A socialist, and proud (I just tipped my tweed cap, but you can’t see it).</p>
<p>On a related note, I like this: [James</a> Connolly: A Rebel Song](<a href=“http://www.marxists.org/archive/connolly/1903/05/rebelsng.htm]James”>James Connolly: A Rebel Song)</p>
<p>This as well: [James</a> Connolly: We Only Want the Earth (1907)](<a href=“http://www.marxists.org/archive/connolly/1907/xx/wewnerth.htm]James”>James Connolly: We Only Want the Earth (1907))</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I am all with you on breaking up the US. I think it is ridiculous that someone who lives a thousand miles (and a world away ideologically) gets to make decisions about me. However, I don’t think a direct democracy works in any kind of large population. Breaking up the US into too small of pieces would leave many places landlocked, which could be a huge source of conflict.</p>
<p>
There is no proof that it is a cause rather than an excuse.</p>
<p>
I like this as well. I do not feel that someone should starve because they do not have enough cotton fiber paper. I do not feel that someone should be murdered because they have only been alive for 2 months. I do not feel that anyone should be oppressed or subjected to the hate and discrimination of others.</p>
<p>
I contest that the burden of proof lies with you. What are some major wars or obstructions to peace caused solely by religion? I expect your list to be large enough to justify your use of the word "“most”.</p>
<p>I would unpopularly suggest setting in place some sort of worldwide population control on humans. (i.e. one/two child policy for everyone, correct the monstrous reputation associated with birth control in some places, etc.) That way, as romani so nicely put it, less need and less strife. Now, if only people would like sex a little less, er, I mean, sacrifice the family love of a few potential kids…</p>
<p>No Jesus, no peace. Know Jesus, know peace.</p>
<p>lol not Obama socialist either (to all conservative people - he is not a socialist of any kind. Stop being stupid)</p>
<p>just for kicks, my socialist programme:
<p>the only difficulty is greed, which many political philosophers have maintained is an intrinsic part of human thought, but I believe that if I can value pride in human accomplishment over material things (as I do), then it would be possible for all people to (and not difficult either)</p>
<p>too bad my musings are hopeless, so I vote GDP</p>
<p>^^^^ I argue that the violence in the Middle East is caused mostly by religious extremists. Also, the Crusades. Native Americans were slaughtered and tortured in the name of God, etc. </p>
<p>I’m not saying that’s the biggest problem. I’m saying that is a big problem in the world. I am also not arguing that it is either an excuse or a cause. I’m saying that it’s very prevalent in many conflicts.</p>
<p>Middle East problems: Mainly the root of British colonial expansion, then leaving a power vacuum. This, coupled with global greed over oil does far more for violence in the Middle East than religion ever could.</p>
<p>Crusades: A Pope saw that Europe was infighting while the Arabs were expanding, so unified Europe in the pursuit of killing the Muslims, “for God”, thereby expanding Papal/European influence, opening up trade routes, and making a pretty penny.</p>
<p>Native American Genocide: Rampant colonial expansion, religion or not. “Gold, Glory, and God”… which do you think was worth more for them? Religion was used by a justification by some, to explain their greedy slaughter, but never forget the efforts of brave priests to protect and later liberate native peoples.</p>