Have we come to any agreement yet?
I thought not, same old thing, the search for right and wrong and round and round we go, most accepting compromise while few absolutely refuse to budge.
The problem we face is that everyone seems to get their conflicting information from some where else and work with in small groups sharing and supporting the faith of their own beliefs. Until a swell of popularity allows their notion of right or wrong to offer the only other choice for an entire population.
It sort of sounds like democracy and looks strikingly similar but with so many of us how did it come down to just two similar beliefs?

, is it done through marketing ,education, persuasion or coercion?

Until you look at the differences between the two Major parties, you could be convinced there were two beliefs on offer but now we find there was none at all.
The fundamental flaw of democracy is that it allows limited choice, two groups dominate each competing to gain market share, … and each designs a product for mass appeal, thereby ultimately offering us the same thing, what we want.
This can be seen quite clearly now, shortly after elections, but last week while the campaign was in full swing had the differences been made too small to see?

Small groups trying to make a difference in the world always interest me, they are passionate often in ignorance and waste so much time struggling against the way it has always has to be.
I’m always joining in, I just can’t help myself, some how I find lost causes a challenge, but it’s not very productive.
I think you just get caught up in the moment, get convinced by the crowd, consume the literature and passionately believe your right while ‘they’ because there is no other option are wrong.

It’s the little things that matter..
“either socialism will triumph over lice or lice will triumph over socialism” Joseph Stalin.


I was an anti-hunt campaigner, in England during the 1970’s it was the right thing to do, I was vegetarian as well and I guess looked the part in my combat clothes, as we fought hard with cologne. It was our best weapon, no one ever accused us of BO, cheap perfume put anyone off including the dogs.
We battled and baited away for a couple of seasons, and got nowhere in the struggle but every where on foot and eventually we all found other things to do, but that was at the beginning of a very long road we could pass the baton on, we had done our part, it was a movement.
Of course recently a small group of hunters combined their resources and became demonstrators themselves once it looked like the anti-hunt activists were in with a chance. They had links with media, politics and business, they were upper class and converged on London presenting one of or the largest demonstration that London ever saw. As activists ‘they’ became an economic boom for hotels restaurants and tourism in London, down for the day the country converged on London. ‘They’ stayed at the Savoy, had breakfast at the Ritz and driven to the demo, every one like them. They had brunch and dined out, sipped tea and spoke posh to reporters claiming that a ban on hunting would be the death of the British country side. Gaining as much publicity in one weekend than the anti hunt movement had achieved in 30 years, now the government is reconsidering banning hunting.
In Australia we have a logging vehicle convoy to offer in parallel as pop up’s against sustained activist who spend months or years protecting and traveling between forests, but it doesn’t matter much, as money counts.

Beliefs change as we grow and mature, if knowledge is limited our hope and certainty is expanded but as we learn naivety is reduced, beliefs are undermined and a new reality merges to guide the new presumed adopted truth into our grasp.

If you listen to vegetarians they believe humans can live without meat, its not a very realistic belief, its true on one level but is also extremely naive. Which is surprising because most vegetarians I know have above average intelligence, otherwise they would not have developed the alternate life view or be able to sustain daily requirements and fit in all that food.

I don’t believe their diet has developed protein deficiency and starve their minds and disabled function, so I have to look deeper for the real reasons behind their belief.
The last time I looked at a sheep all it was doing was eating vegetables all day, that’s a dedicated vegetarian.
But I haven’t got time to do that! I had to become educated and spend more time preparing food and planning meals so that the maximum nutrition could be absorbed in one hit.
However if I eat sheep, its more efficient. The animal does all the work processing vegetables into meat and I get a dinner that took years to prepare. I support the view by pointing out that our bodies are built for consuming highly nutritious fuel, we were designed to eat meat and two Veg. We are the ultimate survivor and along with our livestock we are the only mammals that still thrive in the world, so why should we presume to know better than nature?

In some places in the world growing vegetables is a problem, there is no water for intensive agriculture and sheep have to work harder and longer to get fat, so what should people do for food?
They cannot afford to import exotic vegetables, so eating meat is not a choice.
While Eating animals in cold climates is the most ecologically wise thing to do, to maintain body temperature meat has no substitute, animals grow all year round, and they are always in season., available at the shop or just walking around, but in each cases just add heat and eat, animals are a convenience food.

But say that to a vegetarian and they will bite your head off, tear you limb from limb regardless of your feelings…they will continue to believe a myth, because the idea of eating meat makes them feel sick, and that is the real reason they don’t, which is reason enough for them but not enough for the rest of you to share their beliefs.

Dolphin friendly… but not shark or turtle safe…while tuna suffer plenty and become an endangered species.
Saving Tuna becomes a john west marketing campaign.

The feeling of having an inadequate reason to be a vegetarian nurtures the animal cruelty debate, with the environmental angle. Sure land degradation is affected by all those hard hoofs, and intensive farming is very cruel to the inmates, but that’s life.
For most of the world there is no choice meat must be produced, and force fed and the suffering is always kept out of sight. Consumers know that more humane ways of treating animals would result in higher costs, so we don’t want to fix it because for us it ain’t broke.

I don’t believe that animals domesticated or wild would be allowed to live if we did not value their meat, forests throughout the world would be cleared and wildlife would be decimated in favor of crops.
Which is happening already as we develop Tree plantations. Poisoning would be common to protect food crops and reduce losses, full scale extermination would be encouraged so that world wide agriculture could boom and feed the world.

So It’s a good thing sometimes that we disagree.

Industrialized nations have a similar problem, to restrict fossil fuels limits economic growth, they are trying hard to convince us of ways around it, but as growth demands new resources so burning must carry on.

Sadly there is no alternative, the Kyoto agreement only restricts emissions to 199? levels which in its self does not solve the global warming crises, the shadow of industrialization will remain with us and will still threaten the world.

But to stop feeding off the wealth enjoyed makes us all feel sick so we cannot be allowed to believe industrialization can do any real or permanent harm. If it posed such a threat we have faith that we could fix the problem. Buut would we be told?

However if everyone read the same information and believed the same thing there would be no argument, we would all agree, and we would all sacrifice our lifestyles willingly for the sake of the planet, we would go to war to stop pollution not just refueling from its cause.

I guess that’s why books dismissing global warming are promoted and our media is supporting ‘economic growth will be the savior of all human kind” it’s a myth to support a majority belief.

To alleviate poverty the developing world must cause more pollution once development starts, how else can industrialization go global without causing more CO2? If it spearheaded green technology and sustainable growth in clean industry shouldn’t our nations be able to set the example first?.

But then there’s the argument that we must help the underdeveloped nations until they can afford to look after themselves, the argument pulls at our heart strings, and we are swayed into believing western leaders are being benevolent.

It’s a con job, we became developed by exploiting the wealth of non western countries, for the developing world to reach our standard of living they must go to war, because that is how resources are won, but who will they attack?
There is no forth world so any attack will exhaust any resource while we defend our stocks, and the resource war has already begun, but a myth is already giving us the excuse to carry on.

You will have to decide that for yourself as our media promotes a faith based on popular belief so what you see is tailored to support a belief that sustaining growth can be achieved while resources deplete.
Its very hard to argue but the enlightened see through the trees after moving just a bit to the left off center.

With Books Papers TV and here on these independent pages all information gets a bit confusing, so who do you believe? Who secures your faith?, and who can you trust to tell the truth?
Self interest groups?, western subsidized scientific reports, or should you look else where?

I wonder… are there any Paleontologists in the Islamic world? Or Muslim evolutionary experts? or would the contradiction of faith prevent such notions from ever being considered. But as we all submit to faith based belief and reject confronting evidence isn’t it reasonable to say that beliefs are built upon supported notions not facts.

My dad told me just the other day that global warming and ozone depletion were caused by the same thing, car pollution.
I said he needed to read more, he then showed me a book and sure enough the author had written just that, so I told my dad that the church once thought the world was flat, I said “ no one actually lies they just say whatever supports their interests” and I left it at that …it’s a faith issue.

Faith is the surrender, its where you have found comfort in a shared belief and wish only to hold on tight, faith stops questioning and through faith a community is found, where each member needs you as much as you need them.
People survive quite happily in these bubbles, they shut out information that challenges them and control education so that questions do not weaken the fabric of their ideals, it works. if you don’t agree with them you are the enemy, this works for Amway as well George Bush it also works for Activists and in the groundswell of support it is assured that you get dragged along as well....