- 28 Jul 2005
- 5,238
- 172
- Thread starter
- #51
I am happy to see this thread back in action again !! I really hope that all read what Mycernius has written above, and this immediately following paragraph before I go into my basic post here:
I originally opened this thread based on ideas and hopes which I have towards a future social state, and the conversation between two members' discussion in the 'All Things Japan' forum area. The theme of this thread, as well as it's topic and discussion area, is focused on what would make a compromise in the Middle East. That would surely require some embedding on some points, but please keep in mind that discussing history will lead to nowhere, and that just complaining about the ills or wrong doings of this or that local government in the area, will probably end up in circular patterns of debate. I would hope to see more synergizing here !! What WOULD make for a compromise?
* * * * * * * * * * * * * *
I have not been much of a fan of the general Israeli government for some time now. To a larger degree, I have taken the ills caused by that general government to be real, and to be problematic. That said, however, I tend to feel that the US/UK push to give a nation-state to the Jewish people was about as altruistic a movement as any great political move towards a certain people, down on their luck, could be. If such altruistic emotions had been equally shared by the local nations of that time, things may well have gone more smoothly.
Now, however, it is clear that there is far too much tension. While not all elements of tension may be eradicated, a good compromise would be nice.
I would say that as a first step, the concept that any of the land belongs to any single national/tribal group should have to be balanced by the concept that all the planet is that to which we 'belong.'
As a second step, the divisive concept that the three religious belief-systems are non-inclusive would have to be balanced by the concept that none of the three can definitively claim validity over the others in the final analysis.
As a third step, all the general governments would have to relinquish a much larger degree of sovereignty to the UN.
The vehicle to promote and activate these changes would be a well balanced, objective and open-minded education system that would be equal to all populations of all the nation-states involved. I hope to look at these too.
I originally opened this thread based on ideas and hopes which I have towards a future social state, and the conversation between two members' discussion in the 'All Things Japan' forum area. The theme of this thread, as well as it's topic and discussion area, is focused on what would make a compromise in the Middle East. That would surely require some embedding on some points, but please keep in mind that discussing history will lead to nowhere, and that just complaining about the ills or wrong doings of this or that local government in the area, will probably end up in circular patterns of debate. I would hope to see more synergizing here !! What WOULD make for a compromise?
* * * * * * * * * * * * * *
I have not been much of a fan of the general Israeli government for some time now. To a larger degree, I have taken the ills caused by that general government to be real, and to be problematic. That said, however, I tend to feel that the US/UK push to give a nation-state to the Jewish people was about as altruistic a movement as any great political move towards a certain people, down on their luck, could be. If such altruistic emotions had been equally shared by the local nations of that time, things may well have gone more smoothly.
Now, however, it is clear that there is far too much tension. While not all elements of tension may be eradicated, a good compromise would be nice.
I would say that as a first step, the concept that any of the land belongs to any single national/tribal group should have to be balanced by the concept that all the planet is that to which we 'belong.'
As a second step, the divisive concept that the three religious belief-systems are non-inclusive would have to be balanced by the concept that none of the three can definitively claim validity over the others in the final analysis.
As a third step, all the general governments would have to relinquish a much larger degree of sovereignty to the UN.
The vehicle to promote and activate these changes would be a well balanced, objective and open-minded education system that would be equal to all populations of all the nation-states involved. I hope to look at these too.
