Perhaps the answer isn't right or left... maybe it's up? - Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community

irateplatypus · 09-19-2004, 12:10 PM

Ok, hear me out.

when people first started to band together in groups there were tribe-to-tribe conflicts. people would kill eachother over hunting rights to a particular valley or to settle disputes about trade or women.

tribes banded together then civilization grows to city vs. city disputes...

cities join forces then nation fought against nation...

then alliances of nations vs. alliances of nations

now we're at the point where we wouldn't think of killing our neighbors for food, but the scale of conflict has grown outwards. today, human conflict is rarely fought on a local scale... but against political bodies across the globe.

it seems that human conflict has a myopic component to it. that conflict may be reduced if we could enlarge our view of how big the world is. instead of fighting over a piece of the resource pie (whether that be a valley, or a continent) we, for the first time, can think about working together to enlarge the total pie unendingly.

i'm proposing that space travel and space related development may be the panacea for the world's conflict ills. if all of humanity could expand our awareness of how big the world is to encompass something bigger than the rock we all stand on perhaps that would give us a better perspective on how much in common we all have.

i realize that there are some caveats. internal struggles are far from gone... civil war is still present in world politics. still, i believe that humanity has shown a consistent pattern of evolution on this.

the solution i'm pondering wouldn't necessarily have to be a massive reorganization of political boundaries, but it would entail more international coordination. typically international alliances are among the "ok, we promise not to kill eachother as we're agreed we'll kill them if either one of us is attacked" variety. of course, i'm being simplistic... but i hope you catch my meaning. if we worked on something besides a constant redefining of political alliances, perhaps it'd have a positive impact?

i know, i'm sounding like nothing more than a common dirty hippie.

but i think there might be some merit to this principle.

whaddya think TFP?

seretogis · 09-19-2004, 12:17 PM

I think that we would need an outside aggressor in order to unite under one planetary flag. Mankind isn't going to suddenly have an epiphany of the common bond that we share as humans and start dancing in the street.

irateplatypus · 09-19-2004, 12:22 PM

lol, i wasn't talking about uniting under a planetary flag... i'm pretty sure i'd be opposed to that.

i'm talking about something more practical, something nearer in the future.

Ustwo · 09-19-2004, 12:22 PM

I agree with seretogis on this one. We are the winners in billions of years of fighting, and unless we have an outside force to fight or at least contend with, we will fight each other for whatever reason.

The free flow of information helps, but what is it the first thing an oppesive government shuts down?

Rekna · 09-19-2004, 12:32 PM

It's funny that you should mention that Ustwo

http://www.amconmag.com/12_15_03/feature.html

"Free Speech Zones"

smooth · 09-19-2004, 02:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by irateplatypus

now we're at the point where we wouldn't think of killing our neighbors for food, but the scale of conflict has grown outwards. today, human conflict is rarely fought on a local scale... but against political bodies across the globe.

Maybe it has come full circle in that people coalesce into transnational groups that fight on their respective domestic soils.

The detoriation of the nation-state along with your transglobal unified movements might not usher in a new era of peace.

ARTelevision · 09-19-2004, 02:37 PM

irateplatypus, great ideas.
Unfortunately, as long as we're talking homo "sapiens" they ain't going to happen.

Kadath · 09-19-2004, 04:41 PM

ART, I can't decide if that's defeatist or optimistic.

ARTelevision · 09-19-2004, 06:15 PM

It's in line with the other more realistic - i.e. less wishful posts here, I think.

As long as humans are human, I figure we will continue acting as we do. Especially as regards our belief systems - they are after all, what we fight about.

OFKU0 · 09-19-2004, 07:08 PM

Yeah you are right Art. It's interesting how two drunks fighting outside a bar, laden with alcohol and testosteronic machismo can be squarely judged as losers yet substitute armaments for booze and world leaders with drunks and all of a sudden people are deciding the pros and cons of such actions and deciding its worth.

And given that it is a belief system that permeates either example, both are due diligently primal in our ultra advanced world as we know it. Come on y'all. Let's give ourselves a big pat on the back for such civility. (sarcasm)

Ustwo · 09-19-2004, 10:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rekna

It's funny that you should mention that Ustwo

http://www.amconmag.com/12_15_03/feature.html

"Free Speech Zones"

If it makes you feel better the Democrats kept their protestors in a pen too.

You need to understand there is the free flow of information, and then there are just people who wish to disrupt. Freedom of speech is not the right to be heard in all places at all times.

09-19-2004, 12:10 PM	#1 (permalink)
irateplatypus can't help but laugh Location: dar al-harb	Perhaps the answer isn't right or left... maybe it's up? Ok, hear me out. when people first started to band together in groups there were tribe-to-tribe conflicts. people would kill eachother over hunting rights to a particular valley or to settle disputes about trade or women. tribes banded together then civilization grows to city vs. city disputes... cities join forces then nation fought against nation... then alliances of nations vs. alliances of nations now we're at the point where we wouldn't think of killing our neighbors for food, but the scale of conflict has grown outwards. today, human conflict is rarely fought on a local scale... but against political bodies across the globe. it seems that human conflict has a myopic component to it. that conflict may be reduced if we could enlarge our view of how big the world is. instead of fighting over a piece of the resource pie (whether that be a valley, or a continent) we, for the first time, can think about working together to enlarge the total pie unendingly. i'm proposing that space travel and space related development may be the panacea for the world's conflict ills. if all of humanity could expand our awareness of how big the world is to encompass something bigger than the rock we all stand on perhaps that would give us a better perspective on how much in common we all have. i realize that there are some caveats. internal struggles are far from gone... civil war is still present in world politics. still, i believe that humanity has shown a consistent pattern of evolution on this. the solution i'm pondering wouldn't necessarily have to be a massive reorganization of political boundaries, but it would entail more international coordination. typically international alliances are among the "ok, we promise not to kill eachother as we're agreed we'll kill them if either one of us is attacked" variety. of course, i'm being simplistic... but i hope you catch my meaning. if we worked on something besides a constant redefining of political alliances, perhaps it'd have a positive impact? i know, i'm sounding like nothing more than a common dirty hippie. but i think there might be some merit to this principle. whaddya think TFP? __________________ If you will not fight when your victory will be sure and not too costly, you may come to the moment when you will have to fight with all the odds against you and only a precarious chance for survival. There may even be a worse case. You may have to fight when there is no hope of victory, because it is better to perish than to live as slaves. ~ Winston Churchill Last edited by irateplatypus; 09-19-2004 at 12:28 PM..

09-19-2004, 12:17 PM	#2 (permalink)
seretogis Huggles, sir? Location: Seattle	I think that we would need an outside aggressor in order to unite under one planetary flag. Mankind isn't going to suddenly have an epiphany of the common bond that we share as humans and start dancing in the street. __________________ seretogis - sieg heil perfect little dream the kind that hurts the most, forgot how it feels well almost no one to blame always the same, open my eyes wake up in flames

09-19-2004, 12:22 PM	#3 (permalink)
irateplatypus can't help but laugh Location: dar al-harb	lol, i wasn't talking about uniting under a planetary flag... i'm pretty sure i'd be opposed to that. i'm talking about something more practical, something nearer in the future. __________________ If you will not fight when your victory will be sure and not too costly, you may come to the moment when you will have to fight with all the odds against you and only a precarious chance for survival. There may even be a worse case. You may have to fight when there is no hope of victory, because it is better to perish than to live as slaves. ~ Winston Churchill

09-19-2004, 12:22 PM	#4 (permalink)
Ustwo Pissing in the cornflakes	I agree with seretogis on this one. We are the winners in billions of years of fighting, and unless we have an outside force to fight or at least contend with, we will fight each other for whatever reason. The free flow of information helps, but what is it the first thing an oppesive government shuts down? __________________ Agents of the enemies who hold office in our own government, who attempt to eliminate our "freedoms" and our "right to know" are posting among us, I fear.....on this very forum. - host Obama - Know a Man by the friends he keeps. Last edited by Ustwo; 09-19-2004 at 01:13 PM..

09-19-2004, 02:37 PM	#7 (permalink)
ARTelevision I change Location: USA	irateplatypus, great ideas. Unfortunately, as long as we're talking homo "sapiens" they ain't going to happen. __________________ create evolution

09-19-2004, 12:32 PM	#5 (permalink)
Rekna Junkie	It's funny that you should mention that Ustwo http://www.amconmag.com/12_15_03/feature.html "Free Speech Zones"

09-19-2004, 04:41 PM	#8 (permalink)
Kadath Muffled Location: Camazotz	ART, I can't decide if that's defeatist or optimistic. __________________ it's quiet in here

09-19-2004, 06:15 PM	#9 (permalink)
ARTelevision I change Location: USA	It's in line with the other more realistic - i.e. less wishful posts here, I think. As long as humans are human, I figure we will continue acting as we do. Especially as regards our belief systems - they are after all, what we fight about. __________________ create evolution

09-19-2004, 07:08 PM	#10 (permalink)
OFKU0 Junk	Yeah you are right Art. It's interesting how two drunks fighting outside a bar, laden with alcohol and testosteronic machismo can be squarely judged as losers yet substitute armaments for booze and world leaders with drunks and all of a sudden people are deciding the pros and cons of such actions and deciding its worth. And given that it is a belief system that permeates either example, both are due diligently primal in our ultra advanced world as we know it. Come on y'all. Let's give ourselves a big pat on the back for such civility. (sarcasm) __________________ " In Canada, you can tell the most blatant lie in a calm voice, and people will believe you over someone who's a little passionate about the truth." David Warren, Western Standard. Last edited by OFKU0; 09-19-2004 at 07:12 PM..