WHAT'S NEW

About
My Other Blog
Blog Schedule
Activism
Past Blog Posts
Various &
a Sundry Blogs
Favorite
Websites
My Stuff
On The Web
Audio-Visual Updated: 02/25/2026
Favorite
Articles
This Month's Scripture Verse:

For the love of money is a root of all sorts of evil, and some by longing for it have wandered away from the faith and pierced themselves with many griefs.
I Timothy 6:10

SEARCH THIS BLOG
Showing posts with label drones. Show all posts
Showing posts with label drones. Show all posts

Monday, October 26, 2015

ONIM For October 26, 2015

Christian News 

World News

Pick(s) Of The Litter




Posted by at No comments:
Labels: , , , , , , , , ,

Monday, September 7, 2015

ONIM For September 7, 2015

Christian News


World News


Pick(s) Of The Litter



 
Posted by at No comments:
Labels: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Tuesday, September 1, 2015

What A Difference A Year Makes In Protesting





For the past couple of months, I have been attending protests against the use of drones. I have attended these protests before such as last year. The difference between the protests this year and the ones from last year can be summed up in one word: attendance.

The number of protestors participating this year was less than half of those I saw last year. In particular, the age of the protestors involved also changed. While many of the protestors from before were old, the only ones protesting in the past couple of months are old. In fact, I said to a couple of fellow activists that I felt that the protest was a retirement home activity.

This isn't the first time I've seen a drop off in the number of demonstrators. Each of the first two protests I ever took part in, the years were 2005 and 2006, saw around 300,000 people in attendance. Now it would be unrealistic for anyone to expect that number of people at each protest, but the number of demonstrators attending dropped dramatically after the Democrats gained control of Congress in Fall of 2006. Since then, though there were occasionally well attended demonstrations, such as the last one concerning our environmental problems, the number of activists involved never approached the number of people again.

Now there are two points to make here after reflecting on what I just experienced. The first point regards the protesting against drones. In one way, the use of drones produces the same effect as conducting tax-free wars. That is because practices shield the public from some of war's effects. For example, when Bush conducted the unfunded wars against Afghanistan and Iraq, life went on pretty much the same for those of us who did not have family or close friends fighting in the battles. There was neither a draft nor rationing of goods, both of which have occurred in past wars. In addition, we saw no increase in our taxes because of the wars we were conducting.

Likewise, the use of drones shields us from another effect of war: casualties. Yes, there is an immediate benefit here to using drones both for those who serve and their families. But how does conducting wars without consequences stop our use of war or even reduce the number of them?

In the end, conducting unfunded wars and using drones allows us to win the immediate battles while losing our biggest challenge. The biggest battles consist of maintaining public support for the wars. Our biggest challenge is to end war. And while the realists legitimately point out that history teaches that ending war is only a pipe dream, present and future technology lecture us on a harsher reality. That is our continued dependence on wars will eventually lead to the use of WMDs. And once the use of WMDs are introduced into a conflict, there is little, if any, chance that we will survive because the use of WMDs will simply continue until there is no one left to use them. This is not just my opinion, it that of some well-known intellectuals and some retired military leaders since the 1950s.

The second point that the last 2 protests brings up is persistence. Occasional protests, regardless of how well-attended, produce few, if any, results. Unless we persist in activism, the status quo will remain secure. And that status quo consists of manipulating society and its systems for the benefit of those with wealth and power. It isn't the everyday person who benefits from war. Rather, they are usually the ones who pay the highest price for it. It is those who profit from the sale of weapons, other goods and services who benefit from war. 

Making the public believe that they are shielded from the pain of war, as what occurs when either wars go unfunded or using drones, results in fewer people being interested in demonstrating and resisting the wars. In addition, fewer people feel the urgency to to even investigate our policies and reconsider their current personal positions on war. After all, when life is good, don't fix it is the attitude of many. Thus, the shielding of the public from the effects of war has given too many of us a servere case of myopia.  

Simply put, if we are to survive, we must put aside any feelings of hopelessness in order to continue to publicly voice our concerns. Personally, I myself haven't been able to consistently participate in activism for a while because of multiple issues. So, on the one hand, we must not rush to judge those whom we no longer see at the demonstratios. On the other hand, we must see the need to make activism a way of life rather than just a hobby. Democracy demands that we constantly do what we can to control our government. For if we don't control our government, someone else will. And as the Occupy Movement has shown, that someone else who now controls our government are those with wealth and power.

To make activism a way of life, we need to follow what Martin Luther King Jr. said while speaking against the Vietnam War. He stated that when we make profits, gadgets, and property rights more important than people, we are a thing-oriented society. And for as long as we are a thing-oriented society we will not just continue to fight wars, we will be enabling racism. So those of us who oppose war must change from being thing-oriented to being person-oriented if we are going to show others what to do.



Posted by at No comments:
Labels: , , ,

Monday, May 4, 2015

ONIM For May 4, 2015

Christian News



World News



 Pick(s) Of The Litter







Posted by at No comments:
Labels: , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Monday, March 23, 2015

ONIM For March 23, 2015

Christian News



 World News



 Pick(s) Of The Litter




References

  1. https://zcomm.org/znetarticle/the-roots-of-american-racism/

Posted by at No comments:
Labels: , , , , , , , , , ,

Monday, October 6, 2014

ONIM For October 6, 2014

Christian News

World News


Pick(s) Of The Litter

Posted by at No comments:
Labels: , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Wednesday, July 9, 2014

Comments Which Conservatives Block From Their Blogs For July 9, 2014


The comments below should have been included with last week's edition of Comments Blocked By Conservatives but they were temporarily inaccessible. In addition, family obligations will limit the number of comments listed here for the near future.

 June 27  
To Sarah Stanley and her blogpost on using drones for good. This appeared in the Acton blog.
Certainly, drones can be helpful, but there are questions to be asked too.

 First, will a specific use of drones add to the immediate unemployment and wider technological unemployment problem?

 Second, will the use of drones mean sacrificing quality of work because there are some things that humans can do that drones cant?

 Third,  will the use of drones add to the depersonalization and dehumanization of society?

 Fourth, will the legitimate demand for drones justify the current investment in the research and production of drones?

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

To Joe Carter and his blogpost on pay increases and forcing pay increases. This appeared Acton blog.


The problem with this post, or one of the problems with this post, is that it pretends to speak for left-leaning economists. I read left-leaning economists and the concern expressed here is not what they are concerned about. 

 But the main problem with this post is that it is so focused on what any pay raise will do for the businesses involved, it makes what the lack of pay raises do for the  workers involved invisible. It follows here that in Carter's view, ramifications on businesses matter, the effects on the lives of workers and other stakeholders do not. This focus on business comes into play again when neglecting to mention that  pay raises compete with business profits shareholders want to enjoy. I am talking to more and more people who, when dealing with other businesses at their workplace, find that many things in those businesses, including the number of employees and pay, are being sacrificed for the sake of higher shareholder dividends. And with certain retail products, we might want to inquire about the use of sweatshop and trafficked labor because such reduces costs and increases profits eyed by shareholders.

 In addition, there is no mention of corporations that, on the one hand, corporations use gov't assistance to subsidize their payrolls while, on the other hand, do what they can to avoid paying taxes.

 It is unfortunate that so many pertinent factors are left out here.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

To Joe Carter and the video he posted on his blogpost on the moral value of economic growth--it is a short video. This appeared on the Acton blog.
But Smith also saw that the division of labor has dumbing down effect on people because of the limited scope of the work. And when division of labor is applied to countries, that makes some countries dependent on others for vital goods such as food and medicines. This dependence reduces the sovereignty of the weaker nations.

 I could go through the other parts of this video but all of the parts would lead to the same summation: that what is good for business is good for the world. The problems that come with wealth disparity is made moot by economic growth and economic growth, when having reached a certain threshold, will be used to solve environmental problems. But such is a deduction that is not supported by looking at the facts on the ground.

 Finally, the point about economic growth and greed is simply too simplistic. Yes, greed is a part of human nature. But how we grow the economy can either feed or help inhibit that greed.

 This post really make no points about the morality of economic growth because it conflates all economic growth together without distinction as to how that growth comes about or whether there is a limit to which economic growth stops being beneficial to our living--a concern expressed by Chilean economist, Manfred Max-Neef. The basic message about this post and the video it contains is that the financial bottom line is the only concern because all boats will float on the rising waters of profits.  It is similar to the old slogan, "What is good for GM is good for the nation." Did that turn out to be true?

Posted by at No comments:
Labels: , , , , ,

Monday, June 30, 2014

ONIM For June 30, 2014

Christian News


 World News



 Pick(s) Of The Litter

Posted by at No comments:
Labels: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Monday, May 5, 2014

ONIM For May 5, 2014

Christian News
World News



 Pick(s) Of The Litter

Posted by at No comments:
Labels: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
Subscribe to: Comments (Atom)