h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

Taking Action:

The problem with protests is not the fact that taking action is wrong, its not. We have given to us a democratic right to say whatever the hell we like. This is one of the great things about the freedom of the internet. However there are a couple of things I am a bit annoyed at that I want to get off my chest...

Hypocrites

Now hypocrisy is always a problem. One that I am fully aware of. I don't for example think that people should be able to drive there cars at such a pace that it uses up so much fuel that you have more use of fuel then money from the activity. Of course the problem is that I don't think it should be banned. I would actually support a drag-way in Canberra, if I thought the building of one would make the activities that current get performed on the local streets would be performed there. But I am under no illusion that the drag-way will decrease the behavior or in fact make the activity any safer. When we previously had a park for such activities the general public wasn't let in to compete, or use it. And supporting it on economic grounds also makes no sense to me as quite frankly I rather support building a new dam on economic grounds. There is no way that the flow of Moines that comes from a drag-way will be greater than the flow of Moines that would come from say building hemp farms to make paper. There is a simple principle here at stake, if your going to argue on economics the simple fact of the matter is that the price is not right. There are much better things to spend moines on that don't promote the over use of fuel, waste of resources and the continuous cycle of waste, waste and more waste. I hate waste and the simple fact of the matter is that the promotion of a drag-way is likely to increase the cities waste factor of at least 3. Now the problem with both parties is that no matter what they do they cannot win a majority without getting there policies to match that of the majority, either that or argue there policies in such a way that people see them as there own. This is one of the big problems that faces libertarian politicians, they quite often have a problem with having to argue a case that meet with that of the majority. This is because many libertarians do not wish to "preach" or "politicize the cause" its quite often their ideology that they will seem to be hypocrites if they try and win some sort of political advantage from making there own views meet the majority. Of course I myself like and enjoy the political teachings I can get from greens Senator Kerry Nettle. She is not afraid to make her views clear and heard, she is not afraid to argue her case, she quite happily got preferences from the Liberal party to win her senate seat, which is a political tactic that allows her to quite happily say that she represents her seat. If she had not she would not have been able to stand in the double sitting of parliament house and shout at George W Bush, which by the way was all court on a smuggled CNN camera (proves how secure it was, a camera people is not small, it could have been a bloody bazooka!). Now does that make he a hypocrite? no. She did what she had to get her message across, and for that I salute her.

So what is hypocritical?
This is actually a problematic question. The opinion of the views of a simple majority of people does not make it true or indeed a fact. A majority of people used to think the world was flat! did that make it true? Hell no! The world had actually already been discovered to be round by the Egyptians, Romans and Aztecs (this is proved by looking at the art work and there religious texts, Atlas carried a globe, the mathematics required to build the temples, road and engineer the systems that built Roman, Aztec and Egyptian cities) but the idea of the flat earth has now been almost completely dismissed by science. In fact its quite easy to prove the world is round by simply getting a sundial two cities that are a few miles apart and measuring the length of the shadows that come from them and comparing them. However belief in the flat earth theory will obviously mean that I have to be a member of the Columbus society and are obviously a freemason as well (I belong to neither of these organisations). Its a simplistic argument to say that my argument is invalid because I am a green, or that I have a membership card for a certain organisation, I have on more than one occasion had my arguments told that they were dismissed because I was obviously a "communist". Personally I think the communist manifesto is one of the greatest works of religious texts. I don't base my belief on Marx and I do not follow the communist ideal of having the state in control of everything. I am all for free trade, I love progressive economics, but the problem is that progress can be overrated. Its not sensible to simply say that we should have a free trade deal that makes us worse off, and in fact worse than our current trade deal through the world trade organisation. However on pure ideology alone did Jhon Howard sign the deal and as leader of the liberal party, if he believed in it or not his goal to continue being the leader of the party simply meant that he had no real choice in the matter. I don't hate him for doing it on anything other than the grounds that it defaces my political, social and economic beliefs. If I was in the same situation would I sign the deal? If I wanted to be the leader of the party, yes, I would have no choice but to conform. But its quite simple that the green party, the only one I would currently join, does not have the same party structure as that of the Liberal party. It quite possible for someone in the party to join and not have there views not heard. The eventual answer is that there are hypocritical things, but generally its a matter of opinion.

Fight for the Right?
The idea of burning, fighting, holing on, showing is a belief that some of my fellows believe in strongly. I too have shouted at Rodger Dean for being such a week person he did not act on his previously held belief in free education. He instead happily sat as we were in the Council room (this is a big thing, most university councils would not even let you into there meetings, they did, so there was some good, they let us have our say). In fact we waited patiently through the meeting until the agenda item we were interested in (introduction of HECS-HELP at the university and conforming to Brendan Nelson's Higher education reforms). We were able to shout and express ourselves. The point was that we felt we were being heard and listened to in the council room even though the eventual result was a downturn we were able to be there and say we were dead against it. Other universities had students who protested and even felt that they had to resort to violence. Its simple for me to say that right now I don't think there is any reason for violence. I don't think that flag burning or indeed flag waving will achieve anything, However it was funny to bash the hell out of a effigy of John Howard, it was on the news! However that was at ANU. But was fun. Point is that there is nothing I feel wrong with fighting for what you believe in, but the idea is to play the media as well. We played the media by using media releases of our own, Marc my PR friend was able to get the media to make Rodger Dean into the enemy. By using the local media to our advantage we were happily able to get the great media to report on our blight. We have able to get everything to work in the right way to get our views across. Of course thats not always possible and we have to attract attention. Tying yourself to a tree, or bulldozer, for example, or walking around naked to support nudist rights, wearing gothic coving as your a goth, wearing glasses that are as thick as the hubble space telescope because your a geek, becoming a member of the pirate appreciation society cause you love pirates! What else do you do? Its like life. Eat your food in alphabetical order with the creative use of a thesaurus! Do whatever you do with pride, but listen to others advice as well, they can speak words of great wisdom, if your just willing to listen. The basic premise behind doing many of the protest actions that are performed is to make the media pay attention to us and our cause, but if you can't get attention one way, do so another, there are many means of getting your message across. Justify your actions with words though, if you can't get around the means to show that you were violent because you want your views heard and feel like you can't get your message across SAY SO! Don't just sit there on your arse saying "Oh I can't do anything" Look at me! I used to do almost nothing socially or to support the causes I believed in because I thought I could not make a difference, but now I firmly believe that it doesn't matter. Staying at home hurts your ego, and your ego is a hard thing to get past. You have to force yourself to bring change and help yourself believe more, if you really do believe in your cause take action upon it! Find people who are similar to you, go out there and seek them, I myself are trying just that, and yes I feel most of the time that I am still at 1st base, but thats ok, the important part is to feel like your doing something. If you do nothing then you will only feel worse.

Remember politics is the applied science of philosophy, and psychology is the applied science of yourself. Do what you feel you need to, to make you normal. And if you feel like you took things to far, at least you know what your limits are, at least you have learnt from your mistakes, and hell you can go and learn them again! Learn to enjoy the horizon, learn to go to it, or stay away from it if you wish. Just whatever you do, be committed to it, and learn from it.

Enjoy the horizon.