Use access key #2 to skip to page content.

ChrisGraley (29.81)

Middle East contagion could be much more than that.

Recs

6

February 15, 2011 – Comments (8) | RELATED TICKERS: AM.DL2 , CRIS


Besides Iran, Jordan, Syria, Yemen, Bahrain, Tunisha, Algeria, and Saudi Arabia, most African countries could revolt against oppression. Some South American countries can revolt. Cuba could revolt. At no other time in history,  has there been so much potential global rebellion against opression. The closest thing I've seen in my lifetime at a much smaller scale was the crumbling of the Soviet bloc. Every small victory in the former Eastern European countries seemed to amplify the desire of other countries in the area to do the same. I've called people sheep so many times in my lifetime, but the sheep seem to be willing to butt heads a little more lately. This can only be good for the globe. Many years from now, this country will rebel against our own oppression. We have to figure out that we aren't oppressed by one group, but by two groups before we do. We are starting to figure out that the answer to "right or left?" is "NO!" Both sides seem to sell that they have our best interests in mind as they dictate to us what to do. The world seems to be a new entity, unwilling to swallow orders from the people telling them that they are helping them by telling them what they do. We might get to that point eventually. If you don't agree, take a moment to think about your view-point. Do you feel that the other side is selling you the fact that they want to take care of you by telling you what to do? Do you feel that part of taking care of everybody else is telling them what to do, because you know better? Do the oppressed feel that they should be oppressed by people that feel that they are smart enough to control everyone else's lives? What does it say about our country if everyone is passive enough  to be controlled by the people arrogant enough to take control? Are your beliefs justified enough to dictate them to someone else? Are you a stronger man if you control a weaker one? Should power and control determine who is right and who is wrong? If you are weak enough to be controlled are you automatically wrong? If you are strong enough to opress others are you strong enough keep that oppression up enough to quell rebelion? Does anybody on one side understand why the people on the other side hate the fact that the key to your prosperity lies in their oppression? Why does everyone promising Utopia first start off by blaming someone for everyone else's problems? How does man become so sure about what is right, so quickly forget about what is just? How can a country with 400 million people only have 2 opinions? Is man's inhumanity to man worse than man's ignorance of man's inhumanity of man? Are you conditioned to your environment enough to forget about this post tomorrow. If you are still alive 50 years from now and are telling people about your experiences, do you think that you'll be proud of your current role or ashamed? Can you understand how a man on the losing end of 100% of your decisions hates 100% of your decisions? Why is it that every time that your side gets majority rule, you  forget about minority rights? Lets call a spade a spade, Control means oppression. The more that you want to control, the more that you want to opress someone else.  You're more determined on forcing your beliefs than you are concerned about the end results. Why are people so determined to polarize the country surprised when they find people of an opposite opinion? Last but not least, I am actually ashamed with the total number of people on one side or the other that don't understand that they opress other people.  It's one thing to be polarized to only one opinion, but it's another to not understand that people suffer from that opinion. The middle class in this country is oppressed by both sides.Don't be surprised when they rebel against both sides.   

8 Comments – Post Your Own

#1) On February 15, 2011 at 2:37 AM, awallejr (75.87) wrote:

K Chris you really need to break your paragraphs down, otherwise it becomes a wall of text.  Personally I think the internet has a strong influence on world activity now.  People from all over the world communicating amongst each other.  Let freedom ring?

As for control equaling oppression?  I think that is a bit of an extreme.  I would define oppresssion as the exercise of authority or power in a burdensome, cruel, or unjust manner.  That seems more serious than control. You gather a million people and you will get a million opinions. 

I accept the fact that people won't agree with everything or anything I say.  Nothing wrong with differing opinions.  It is only when one person or group of people force their opinions onto others that is a concern.

Report this comment
#2) On February 15, 2011 at 8:20 AM, ChrisGraley (29.81) wrote:

Sorry, it did have paragraph breaks when I posted it.

Please elaborate on the difference between control and oppression a little more.

Who decides that control is unjust enough to be oppression?

Just a few months ago countries were banning Facebook to keep control in the world view. Now the world view has shifted enough to realize that they were protecting oppression.

Is censoring the internet control or oppression?

Is forced healthcare control or oppression?

Is forcing your will upon someone else ever just?

 

 

 

Report this comment
#3) On February 15, 2011 at 8:29 AM, Jbay76 (< 20) wrote:

Oppression..
1. the exercise of authority or power in a burdensome, cruel, or unjust manner. 2. an act or instance of oppressing. 3. the state of being oppressed. 4. the feeling of being heavily burdened, mentally or physically, by troubles, adverse conditions, anxiety, etc. 

First off, I question these definitions as they include the word they are defining.  But, I would say CG is using oppression correctly per definition #4. In the true sense of the word, this post is spot on.  The middle class is being oppressed by both sides (i.e heavily burdened mentally, physically,socially, and financially).Very philosophical post CG, good way to start the day!  Though I do agree with awallejr that it does come off as a wall of text...+1J
 

Report this comment
#4) On February 15, 2011 at 8:36 AM, Jbay76 (< 20) wrote:

Oh, and to add to CG's comment, how funny is it that Clinton is telling other countries that the US will support dissidents using the internet to promote human rights and democracy in repressive states.  I think this is absolutely HILARIOUS given that they are trying to find a way to prosecute Assange for doing just that. 

We truly are governed by some of the dumbest people there are. Or, maybe they realize that we are dumber, easily confused, lazy people who will believe anything and everything we are told......hmm..maybe this is one bad mixer......

Report this comment
#5) On February 15, 2011 at 9:35 AM, Melaschasm (54.40) wrote:

I doubt this will be as big as the fall of the Soviet Union. 

It would be great if freedom really did spread to a dozen countries in the next few years, but one or two new free nations is about the best result I can forsee.

Report this comment
#6) On February 15, 2011 at 10:58 AM, PaxtorReborn (29.93) wrote:

I agree with Mel, the collapse of the USSR saw 15 or so large, new independent states over night

Report this comment
#7) On February 15, 2011 at 8:53 PM, awallejr (75.87) wrote:

 ChrisGraley

In response to your questions, control can be neutral (as in crowd control), benevolent (as in giving people positive incentives to engage in a certain way) or oppressive (torturing people).

Who decides that control is unjust enough to be oppression?

I would think those being oppressed.

Is censoring the internet control or oppression?

I would perceive it more as control since no one is really being harmed, just not having open access.  Now if a person is tortured by the State for having  tapped into the internet, that would be a different matter.

Is forced healthcare control or oppression?

Difficult one because of the penalty section. Generally  I would go in the "control" camp here but it could be oppressive to some if you start fining people for not carrying insurance with said fines accumulating to a point a person can't afford.  This is the one part that has actually been held unconstitutional.  Obviously the Supreme Court will ultimately address the issue.

Is forcing your will upon someone else ever just?

Sure.  Stopping someone from committing suicide, or stopping someone from murdering another person are two obvious examples.

Report this comment
#8) On February 25, 2011 at 10:18 AM, explainstuff (55.22) wrote:

Everything you say is true... but coming to the million dollar question... impact on global economies.... Short term bearish/sideways... max 0-3 months.... if the 'revolts' don't happen when the 'pan is hot'.. they are not happening later....

Even if the revolts happen... it is good/necessary for global economiesand that is bullish in my opinion.

Report this comment

Featured Broker Partners


Advertisement