From: | Antonio Rossin <rossin(at)tin.it> |
---|---|
Date: | Sat, 28 Jul 2007 00:26:48 +0200 |
Subject: | Re: [WDDM] Repeted answer to Antonio |
(a)
Which fault was you referring to? As it is this fault, which I'm
referring to. To the extent that the fault is ours, we are guilty.
Clearly, that of owning no media cannot be considered our fault:
but we shall have failed somewhere, and keep steadily on repeting
the same fault: don't you think so?
Here's my point: no one can be blame if the society where s/he lives is
structured in a arguable way. Stratified societies will ALWAYS carry
discriminations, no matter if we call them democracies, dictatorships,
oligarchies, monarchies. Yet societies are made of several individuals:
if they find their lifestyle is not so fair they can decide to change,
and
i agree with you that they have the power to change. Unfortunately
here come the SUVs. Multinationals don't want to share their profits
and benefits with others and, in order to keep the system stable and
reliable, they make us THINK we can switch profile and gain access
to their wealth. How? Buying a SUV. That simple. Communication,
as i said before, is meant to convince and the few who own and have
full access to the media can spread their opinions and make whatever
they like plausable (if not fashionable). Think about the French and
Russian revolutions: they menaged to change the head of the pyramid
only, not to change the system flattening the stratifications. In
facts just
a few years later new dictators came up. People were really dazed and
confused: they had changed the system but the new system was only
partly different from the old. How could that have happened?
Robespierre, Stalin, Napoleon were really different from Louis XVI
or Nicholas II? I keep saying that the fight is too biased to be fair.
How can we communicate our belief that oil is going to end soon and
bicycle is a viable way to commute for common people? I know it,
you know it and, likely, anyone in this ng knows it. Should we force
others to adopt our viewpoint? I don't think it would be fair. Can we
buy TV and media room to let people know our ideas? I'm sure we
don't have enough money to do it. Multinationals do it because they
get lots of money out of ads by increasing their sellings, but we would
get no money at all from such ads because we don't sell anything.
Are we responsible for what the whole world does? No, Antonio,
i don't think we are: as long as we obey to our conscience and we
don't oblige people i don't think we are guilty of mankind's choices.
We know it, we say it, we make choices that respect what our
conscience suggests us. That's it.
------------------------------------------------------
(a)
Better we speak of recoverable faults -- if any -- that may be relevant
for recovering our (failed) democracy.
Otherwise we are crying only, no way out, and our speaking is useless.
Ciao,
antonio
In a sense all we have said and done so far has been useless. And
yourself
wrote it when you complained about the "uselessness" (i can't find any
better
word, sorry if this sounds too tough) of this ng and decided not to
finance it
anymore.
Am i missing something maybe?
Regards
Giorgio
Well, let's agree, I belong to a higher cast, re to my children, as every
PS I don't consider useless speaking to you all. In this microsystem it
may be useful, but i doubt it may be of any use for common people,
biased as they are by higher casts.