World Peace or World Freedom?

[Dr. Lats]

Here are my thoughts on whether an individual and/or country should focus on peace or freedom...

In summation, it is freedom we seek, not peace. Real peace can be a natural extention of a free reality. If peace is the number one goal, our innate rugged and wild hearts can be suppressed...

YouTube- Freedom Fighters Focus on Freedom, Not Peace


What do you think?

 

[slacker86]

now dont get me wrong i dont disagree with you, but isnt your definition of peace a little narrow? im pretty sure peace is open to some interprutation depending on different individuals. I mean peace as defined as sitting docile at home could actually not be peaceful if the home environment is one that causes agnuish or stress. Needless to say there is some deal of peacefullness desired by most people, for example i rather not have to carry a gas mask around with me for fear that chemical weapons attacks would be happening close to where i live. It gets easy being from America to talk about how peace isnt that important with so few attacks within our own country safety can sometimes be taken for granted. As for freedom i completely agree with you its what everyone wants, they want to do what they want how they want whenever they want and that is important to almost everyone. However to totally negate peace and to have such a rigid definition does not really lend itself to your cause, nor does it really make the video seem realistic.

I think if you focus more on how more freedoms would allow people to be happier in daily life and how government control is limiting peoples freedoms and their happiness it would be better than comparing it to not wanting peace.

i do agree with u to a point but there does need to be some form of government and there do need to be some guidlines and laws just so society does not fall apart, we are way to structured now to just change all the laws in one day and actually deal with it responsibly.

 

[Ricky5145]

neither, neither have ever been in effect throught the world at any time in history. only in cult like societies. its human nature not to always be peacful and unfortunatly is in our nature to be greedy/lazy which then leads to restrictions on the freedoms of others for our own greed.

it is optimistic yes, but unrealistic. i wouldnt want either to be honest. It would be going against nature and something even worse would probably result

 

[slacker86]

ahh yes the john locke vs thomas hobbes debate....im staying out of this one.

 

[Ricky5145]

haha yeah this is a touchy subject for some im not posting in here anymore haha

 

[Dr. Lats]

Slack, yes, it is a bit narrow in the video.

I made an extreme example, just to state that I think freedom is better goal.

Freedom is the opportunity to be hard charging, adventurous, novel, daring, bold, risky...
When living in this manner, its not really 'peaceful' but it is satisfying. When freedom comes first, one can choose to live in peace.

Peace is an extention of a free society...although a 'free society' can be labeled as an oxymoron. LOL...at least, the societies we are accustomed to.

 

[Nitrox]

When freedom comes first, one can choose to live in peace.

Perhaps but one could also choose to live in conflict and then deny others their 'peace.'

Peace is an extention of a free society.

Don't quite agree. Complete freedom means no rules and no laws; this is anarchy. Do you really think that would be peaceful?

Look I am really just playing devil's advocate here. This argument, like most that involve human behavior and the human psyche, has no right or wrong answer. There is a trade-off spectrum and the point of preference along that spectrum varies with each individual and each situation.

 

[Zero V]

We are built differently, humans that is. And within our ranks we are all physically/mentally/spiritually wired differently.

Now some of us, literally seek conflict. It is in our veins, our hearts burn with a desire to face some kind of enemy or position, our dreams are of glory and a death worthy of a spartan. These people, will always find a reason to fight, better to let it be for freedom.

There are some of us who can mediate, who are neutral and can accept the bits of both sides of a social environment. They desire to see balance, and are capable of both war and peace.

And then there are those who are tranquil, who seek peace with such effort they are willing to give up ideals, rights, drive, etc.

There will always be someone fighting for freedom, because there will always be someone trying to take freedoms away(U.S Government anyone??). The choice is do you accept the changes and move on...or do you resist? Freedom is a form of resistance to suppression, and suppression is an act by those who have the power to take away what yo u deem your own rights.

Take the war over in Afghanistan....I think it is beyond the point of hunting terrorists, now their fighters have become more along the lines of freedom fighters. So I cannot blame them as enemy soldiers anymore, they are doing the only thing they can do as humans. Fight for their believed rights.

Freedom is a hard thing to really define, because even in freedom we MUST have limitations. Such as things being illegal, murder, rape, robbery,etc.

Freedoms sphere of influence stops working once a subject crosses the line of "Good for fellow man/bad for fellow man".