Real Time with Bill Maher: Joseph Stiglitz – Iraq’s Opportunity Cost (HBO) – YouTube
(more…)
Iraq War: George W. Bush Leads US Invasion over WMD, Kills Saddam Hussein – YouTube
(more…)
Breaking News 2015 ISIS ISIL DAESH defeated by joined USA IRAN & Iraq Forces Most of Tikrit
(more…)
Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant – Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
(more…)
War and the Advancement of Technology
Since the dawn of time, individuals and groups have settled their disputes through acts of war and violence. Although the nature and methodologies of war have changed, the devastating consequences on civilians and society remains the same, with billions of people having given their life in the name of their cause of country. Now into the 21st century, we remain no closer to subsisting in a state of peace and harmony, despite the many advances that have been made in terms of liberty, knowledge, technology and science.
The Changing Faces of War
Considering that the first recorded war took place in 27AD, the concept of armed and unarmed conflict is one of the true constants of our existence, although the current guise of war is largely unrecognizable to the ones that subsisted before. In terms of historical wars, they were largely civil and fought within a nation’s boundaries, with a view to settling power disputes that often concerned politics, territory or religion. Very rarely did conflicts traverse into international waters, and the main purpose of a navy or military unit was to protect the peripheries of the nation that they represented.
The Issue of Social Perspective
As the US continues to witness civilized protests and an increasing display of social unrest, it would be easy to assume that the nation is in the midst of a truly challenging and difficult set of circumstances. While this may be true in some respects, it may be considered a view without the requisite level of perspective, as any issue that the country is currently experiencing pale into significance when compared with those of previous generations. Social issues are always relative however, both to the time and specific demographics, and need to be considered on their own merits accordingly.
This was exemplified and drawn into focus earlier this week, as it was revealed that the last remaining US survivor of World War 1 died peacefully in his sleep on Sunday. Frank Buckles of West Virginia had celebrated his 110th birthday on February 1st, and as he passed so too did the final living reminder of one of histories most ill conceived and barbaric wars. With this in mind, it is interesting to consider the magnitude of social issues between generations, and understand the role that governments play in cultivating trust and perspective within society.
The Changing Perception of Hardship
As Frank Buckles passing comes at a time of social discord, it is an opportunity to apply this perspective to contemporary USA and draw conclusions from its current situation. The first thing that becomes apparent is how the perception of hardship has evolved over the generations, which is obviously a clear consequence of progression and technological advancement. As living conditions improve in terms of health, technology and privilege, so too individuals become accustomed to particular standards and expect more from their existence.
Does Free Speech Only Apply to Those with Nothing to Say?
For those who believe wholeheartedly in the principles of democracy and liberal government, the freedom of speech is something that should subsist without any restriction or imparted conditioning. It is an accepted privilege of democratic rule, that allows individuals to express their thoughts and feelings without the fear of censorship or reprisal, and also affords them the freedom to access information in order to aid an independent quest for knowledge and wisdom.
However, if the core values of democracy are to be maintained entirely, then the freedom of speech and expression must be upheld without exception and in every viable social circumstance. If this is not the case, then the concept becomes one that actually opposes liberal rule, especially in situations where individuals are censored or punished for revealing views which are deemed to be controversial or potentially divisive. The question is whether free speech is an unconditional feature of democracy, or any applicable to those who have nothing to say.
A Case in Point
An example of this issue unfolded in the US this week, as a high school English teacher was suspending for expressing her anger and frustration on an internet blog. The text contained numerous disrespectful or insulting insinuations towards her students and the methods of teaching in contemporary society, although the writer refrained from making specific references to their place of work or individual students.
WikiLeaks: Encouraging Empowerment or Disruption?
One of the most contentious issues that surrounds the World Wide Web is the surfeit of information that can be published and accessed by anyone. The intended purpose of the Internets swathes of resource is to empower and educate individuals within society, and prevent them with the factual data, opinion and objective information to aid them in an individual quest for wisdom. This is with a view to liberating society and giving each individual member the tools to further their own education on desired subjects.
To this end, Wikileaks is an international non profit organization that was founded in 2006, and strives to deliver anonymous submissions of private and covert news to a wide and uncensored audience. As they protect the source of the information they are able to seek and publish highly controversial and topical information, which is served in the greater interest of keeping the public updated with relevant data. In keeping with the nature of their operation, they have been involved at the centre of several well documented international incidents.
Freedom of Speech and its Consequences
If anything, Wikileaks is the evocation of the freedom of speech and democratic values. In its purest form, it provides a platform through which it is able to deliver entirely relevant information that would otherwise be suppressed and censored by government bodies. In effect, it takes control away from governments who wish to control what information is fed to society, and ensures that people are empowered to be as informed as they wish to be. Of course, this concept is one that has produced a vast differential in terms of its reception and response.
