 |
|  |
 |
|
Inverse Icarus
|
 |
flying too low to the ground
May 2001 time: 00:26
|
|
Did West Germany succeed all alone? Did West Germany have to fear that their "enemies" would have weapons of mass destruction, with no way (or no ally) to retiallate? The USSR Had to blow tons of money producing nukes just so that America would have to think twice about using nukes. And you're thinking "they wouldnt use nukes!", well, they did, right on one of Russias Neighbors.
North/South Korea.
West/East Germany.
Taiwan-Hong Kong/China.
in all of your provided examples, major economic powers (US, UK, etc) aided the capitialist side more than the communist. in fact, in several instances, they actually but SANCTIONS and RESTRICTIONS on the communist regimes.
Capitialism only succeeds because it is the globally accepted economic system, all the capitialist nations get together and help eachother out. Why is the globally accepted economic system? because Capitialism is the easiest economic system to impliment. People are greedy. They want more than they have. The natural order of things created a system where their greed can be appeased economically. But is that the way is should be? Thats called is "ought from is" fallacy in formal arguments, saying "this is how it is, therefore thats how it should be."
The natural order of things also created "rules of ascention" in societies, look at animals, even the great apes. Killing the leader of a society is the way to rise to power in many societies. But is that the way it should be? No. So (modern urbanized) society adapted to that, and made laws against it.
Now you're thinking how extreme that case is, how much worse killing is compared to something like greed. but it's the same basic thing, rudimentary urges deep rooted in our evolution that influence the way we act. Society has worked to tame / direct most of them away, but the seemingly harmless ones have been overlooked.
Resources are finite. When you have more, someone else has less. When a group has all, some group has none.
This is the way it is. Is this the way it ought to be?
|
|
|  |
 |
|  |
 |
|
SirTweek
|
|
quote: Originally posted by cyclotron7
Interestingly enough, most of the time in my experience it is the parents who ask for drugs to treat their children suspected of ADHD, even when a doctor does not advise it. Are parents "the capitalists" now? Since when did everything bad or dumb become a capitalist conspiracy? |
Most of the time it is the parents that eventually give in and use the medications. Every parent I have met decided on medication as a last resort. Some of them waste thousands of dollars on stupid herbal schemes or diets before going to medication. I have no statistics to report on this but from my personal experiences on my Canadian ADHD website it seems that parents find giving out medication to their child as wrong. They hold this belief until they find out the best way to help their child is with medication and therapy.
On the other hand teachers can not force medication neither can they administer it without parent's approval so saying it's a consipiracy of teachers/captalists or whoever is wrong. I suppose you could go with the traditional stance of all conspiracy theorists and just say everyone is stupid and being duped but you and those that believe in your ideology. This way you could say teachers force parents because parents being the unenlightned unwashed masses are to stupid to figure it out for themselves.
I was diagnosed with ADHD and dysgraphia 22 years ago and you really don't want to know what it was like odin before ADHD kids were treated special. I made it, but it would have helped if people in the school system understood me.
|
|
|  |
 |
|  |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:26. Apolyton Time is 00:26. |
top of page
|
| archivepost |
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|