Globalization

[Freethinker]

Originally posted by: BlameTheEx

One day we may come to regret our treatment of Africa.

We should already be ashamed of how the Developed world is dealing with Africa.

Indeed, possibly ignoring the plight of Africa has already killed us by the millions. I am talking about AIDS. It almost certainly originated in Africa, and after crossing over from monkeys it was probably, at first, only mildly infectious. Had Africa had a modern, free, health service it might have been detected, and the victims isolated before it spread.

AIDS was not spread until it hit the US. Africa did not have much of it at all until later.

Right now AIDS is a disaster, but things could easily get even worse. We have watched AIDS mutate from a mildly infectious disease to a disease easily contagious through homosexual sex

AIDS did not "mutate ...to a disease easily contagious through homosexual sex". The AIDS which has becomes so infamous as a Homosexual issue is basically the same as it was from the first case. There is nothing inherently connected to the virus itself and homosexualtiy. The person that brought it here from Africa, patient Zero, was from Canada. He was "active" in the gay community. That is why it spread initially thru the gay community. Not because it had some special connection to homosexuality.

to a disease contagious through ANY unprotected sex.

It has had the same method of contagion since day one. It is transfer of seminal fluids under any process, not just sex.

 

This is one of the big problems with the fight against HIV/AIDS, is mis-information such as this.

 

Just as one poster some time ago that had been taught that AIDS had been aroound since "Creation" (He was a Christian) and it became active when someone had MULTIPLE sex partners.

 

All of this is to promote some god based punishment agenda. This promotes that it was the fault of homosexuality or sexual promiscuity. Such nonsense is harmful to efforts to stop the spread of AIDS. Again we see how Religious mindset harms Society. Further, the greatest stumbling block to stopping the spread of AIDS is also religion. Perhaps the individual most responsible for the continued spread of AIDS is the POPE. The Catholic Church is strongly opposed to even simple education regarding the use of condoms. This is true of a large segment of the religious missionaries in the 3rd world countries in which AIDS is still spreading like wild fire. The intentional promotion of ignorance and mis-information by religious efforts is the only reason AIDS is continuing to spread at the rate it is.

 

Just as the US, under the Bush admin, held back it's UN dues unless the UN stopped even mentioning condom use. This "Abstenence Only" fairytale which is being so heavily funded to the direct detriment of REAL solutions that WORK.

 

Once more we see direct negative results from the promotion of Religion. And how it has a strong negative affect on improvements around the world, the improvement of Society at large.

[IrishEyes]

Way off-topic.

Please bring this one back under control.

Bash Bush in the Bush thread.

Talk God in the Creating a Religion thread.

I suggest starting a new topic to discuss Africa/AIDS, if anyone is interested.

This one is about Globalization guys.

 

Thanks for your cooperation!

[BlameTheEx]

Irish

 

Hm. I first mentioned Aids so I will assume that is aimed at me. If not, ignore this.

 

I am still on topic. I was pointing out that disease is globalised too.

So are all to many other matters. What happens in other peoples countries should concern us all. Whether we feel we have the responsibility, duty, or the right to interfere, it is simply the case that we must, or suffer the consequences of our inaction.

 

Our economy is global. Electronic business is making more and more of the economy untaxable by any particular country. Multinational companies move production to wherever wages, and taxes are lowest. Governments NEED taxes. Only a global solution will save them. The alternative is unregulated capitalism. Can you imagine a world where there is no money to enforce regulations being a good thing?

 

Disease is global. I have made my point.

 

Pollution is global. There is a hole in the ozone layer. Global warming has changed from "There is no scientific proof" to "Its too late to do anything". It isn't too late to do anything, but without strict, enforceable, world wide rules we are all in big trouble.

 

Terrorism is global. The cold war left a legacy of trained and armed people, with good reasons to hate both west and east, but 9/11 taught us that they don't need weapons, just hate and our own technology. The terrorists there had no weapons but knives, commercial training in flying aircraft, and a willingness to die. We can, and should fight terrorism wherever we can. However, that is a short term, and not very successful solution. We should be removing the reasons for hatred. We have done something very wrong when people are so angry they die to make their point. We should not allow childhood's to be that bad in any country. Welfare programs were never really about compassion, they were about avoiding civil unrest. That unrest is now an international problem.

 

And, yes, Oil is global. America is right to insist that the oil keeps flowing - for all of us. The world economy depends on it. If we get an economic collapse, people will die. Lots of them. It's just appalling that so much oil flows to America. Now if they would only do what the UK has done, and Europe in general, and tax petrol heavily. Again we need world wide control. There is only so much oil in the ground, and much of it is unrecoverable. It must not run out before we have viable alternatives.

 

Ok. That's about it. The world is steadily shrinking. It is already too small for any county to have the right to govern itself regardless. It is too small for anything but federalisation, with an effective world government that doesn't shrink from interfering with what individual countries consider internal matters.

[Freethinker]

Originally posted by: BlameTheEx

Irish

 

Hm. I first mentioned Aids so I will assume that is aimed at me. If not, ignore this.

Ya Blame, it's all your fault! :-)

I am still on topic. I was pointing out that disease is globalised too.

So are all to many other matters.

...

Our economy is global.

...

Disease is global. I have made my point.

...

Pollution is global.

...

Terrorism is global.

...

And, yes, Oil is global.

I agree completely. Each and every one of these issues is Global in scope and thus would be involved in any discussion on Globalism. And yes, let's not forget Religion. After all, the mention of a god was a big discussion in the recent creation of the EU's Constitution. Which fortunately opted to keep it Secular and not provide yet another prejudicial contentious division.

 

Globalization is happeneing no matter what anyone wishes or does. As you state, the world is shrinking. Not much can happen anywhere without it impacting almost the entire planet in some way.

 

One question is whether a moderator run amuck has Global impact? It would seem to based on this being a Global group! :-)

[IrishEyes]

One question is whether a moderator run amuck has Global impact? It would seem to based on this being a Global group! :-)

 

Only if the Moderator enjoys spreading joy and cheer with a gang of global goofballs.

 

But WOW... global impact? That's exactly what *I* was hoping for today. Were you really kidding, or is this something that needs a PM? I'm sure you'll take that as an invitation.

 

And no, Blame, it wasn't specifically directed at you, or to anyone, inflated egos to the contrary. I agree with your points. And we have all seen that the definition of Globalization is different to different people.

However, dictionary.com says:

Globalization : growth to a global or worldwide scale; "the globalization of the communication industry";

globalism: n. A national geopolitical policy in which the entire world is regarded as the appropriate sphere for a state's influence.

 

As the topic is about globalization, not globalism, I wanted to bring it back to topic. Using the two words interchangeably is tantamount to using evolution instead of abiogenesis. And we all know how horrible it is to do that.

 

 

EDIT: Done after reading Uncle Martin's 'liar' post, and realizing there was a smiley at the end of the sentence. I honestly didn't see it when I first responded, and apologize if anyone was offended by my initial comment.

[lindagarrette]

Globalization should not be different to different people. We can't really discuss something that has no common basis for understanding. It means growth of a political, social, or economic system to encompass the world. Technology (including communication) facilitates it. It's neither good nor bad. As Thomas Friedman (the best recognied authority) says:

 

"[Globalization] can be incredibly empowering and incredibly coercive. It can democratize opportunity and democratize panic. It makes the whales bigger and the minnows stronger. It leaves you behind faster and faster, and it catches up to you faster and faster. While it is homogenizing cultures, it is also enabling people to share their unique individuality farther and wider."

 

Globalization has dangers and an ugly dark side. But it can also bring tremendous opportunities and benefits. Just as capitalism requires a network of governing systems to keep it from devouring societies, globalization requires vigilance and the rule of law.

 

Anti-trust laws, the Securities and Exchange Commission, labor unions, charities, the Federal Trade Commission, and countless other agencies and organizations keep American capitalism in check. Similar transparent mechanisms are needed to make sure globalization is a positive force in the world.

 

Globalization will always have cheerleaders who are blind to the destruction globalization can cause. And it will always have strident opponents blind to the way globalization gives some people their first opportunity to fulfill basic aspirations.

 

As with most issues, the majority of people will be in the middle. They will see globalization not as something to worship or demonize. Instead, they will see it as something to mold, shape and manage for the betterment of everyone.

[IrishEyes]

Well said, linda. Thanks for helping to keep things in perspective.

[BlameTheEx]

linda

 

Yep. I can go along with that.

[wildcardmy]

AIDS did not "mutate ...to a disease easily contagious through homosexual sex". The AIDS which has becomes so infamous as a Homosexual issue is basically the same as it was from the first case. There is nothing inherently connected to the virus itself and homosexualtiy. The person that brought it here from Africa, patient Zero, was from Canada. He was "active" in the gay community. That is why it spread initially thru the gay community. Not because it had some special connection to homosexuality.

 

Just as one poster some time ago that had been taught that AIDS had been aroound since "Creation" (He was a Christian) and it became active when someone had MULTIPLE sex partners.

May I know where and how AIDS began to appear? Who got infected by it first and how? Or did it happen ages ago there really isnt any proof to justify any answer?

[Fishteacher73]

Here is a whole thread that discusses the origins of human AIDS:

http://www.hypography.com/scienceforums/showthread.php?t=1260

[IrishEyes]

Thanks for the info on AIDS, Fish.

This thread is being closed, as it was inactive for many months. The thread was about Gloablization, if anyone cares to continue it in a new thread.

Thanks for your interest, and for being members of Hypography!