Hello Keith and All ;
Keith wrote :
> You really should check this out, IMHO, there's
> no need to be so pessimistic, and I don't think it's
your nature.
I wouldn't say I was pessimistic, but I agree it may
appear that way.
> I've been there, I was angry for years, angry about
all the callous
> injustice in the world. Indeed I had so much to be
angry about, I was
> encountering it face to face all the time in my
work.
Angry is not a word that I would use to describe
myself, but I agree in a short post, it may seem that
way. Sadly frustrated is more like it. My faith
gives me an unusual perspective on this.
An analogy for you. I was always good in school
without trying too hard. I view adversity in life as
like a school test. A good student likes hard tests.
It is the only way to differentiate the class after
all. Only a poor student likes easy tests. If the
test is easy, everyone passes and looks the same. A
statistically relevant test must be hard enough that
some students fail, and it gives the opportunity for
the bright students to shine. Without hard tests
there would be no bright students. I always liked the
hard tests.
Jesus came bearing the staggering gift of eternal life
to give to the people of Israel and they beat Him,
hung Him on a cross, and killed Him. Talk about being
wronged, and hanging there has GOT to hurt, but Jesus
did not complain in the face of the most overwhelming
wrong anyone could ever imagine right to the end. So
I don't look at callous injustice or anything else as
causes for anger or revenge. Instead, I view
adversity and callous injustice as opportunities to
demonstrate how close I can follow the infinitely high
standard that Jesus set. When adversity comes my way,
I thank Jesus for the opportunity to practise this.
The more adversity the more it give me an opportunity.
It is not easy and I am not successful many times.
> But, it's the
> wrong approach. I stopped being angry about 15 years
ago. The sources
> of the anger remain, or in many (but not all) cases
have increased, I
> don't pretend about it, I do confront it, I don't
have any time for
> rose-tinted specs, and, truth to tell, I still do
get angry
> sometimes, but it's short-lived, and it doesn't
colour my vision.
You are making some very good points, but I think I
have come to terms in my own way, so I feel I need to
explain my motivation a little more thoroughly. I
think it is significantly different that you expect.
There was a movie I saw once, possibly the name was
"The Dead Zone". I can't remember. It was about this
guy who could see your future by touching your hand.
He touches the hand of a politician elect, and in a
vision he sees that in the future this politician will
become president and launch nuclear missiles. So he
ponders this difficult question and determines to
assinate the politician and spend the rest of his life
in jail rather than let the world fall into nuclear
war. Someone out there may remember this movie.
Anyway, in the movie he touched the hand his young son
and he saw that his son would go ice skating later in
the day, but the ice would break and he would fall
into the icy water and drown. So of course he didn't
let his son go ice skating. Now a nice, well meaning
neighbor came over with her son and they were going
ice skating. He touched the hand of the neighbor's
son and once again he saw the ice breaking. He tried
to convince this very nice bubbly neighbor that the
ice would break, but the neighbor told him every
reason why it wouldn't break, ie. it is too early in
the spring season for thaw, the ice is thick, everyone
is skating, etc. No matter what he said the neighbor
was not convinced that the ice would break. Finally
he smashed his cane on the table and screamed at the
top of his lungs "THE ICE IS GONNA BREAK!!". (You're
being so negative!)
That's a lot like how I feel. The ice is gonna break.
Keith wrote :
> Washington and Beijing (and the WTO)
notwithstanding, there's much
> more common cause between the *people* of the US and
the *people* of
> China than there's cause for distrust, rivalry and
enmity.
Yes, agreed, but the question remains whether this
common cause is enough. It hasn't been in the past.
The powers sometimes self inflict damage to get
everybody riled up. Once everyone is riled up and the
war drums beating, anything is possible. Therefore
as humans we must ignore what someone appears to have
done to someone else or even us if we want to defeat
this strategy. It will not be easy to make this
change.
Keith wrote :
> We ordinary people, Gustl's "common
> people", will win this age-old game in the end, it's
our destiny.
Absolutely, ABSOLUTELY correct, but its going to be
one heck of a roller coaster ride until then.
Keith wrote :
> As for trouble being inevitable, I don't agree with
that either,
> regardless of what the intentions might be (on both
sides).
> An article titled "Slowly but steadily, India will
overtake China"
> was published in the IHT about six months ago. It's
discussed here,
> interesting:
Please allow me to elaborate on this point. Not trying
to convice anyone, just explaining myself.
Although I can see a scenario where trouble is not
inevitable, there are certain pre-requisites which
would need to be in place before I would give it any
chance of success. For one, the population of the US
increases about 25,000 every day due to births. For
any real change we would need about ten percent of
those people actively involved in biofuels. If you
have a different percentage, I am listening and we can
recalculate. This tells me that we should be seeing
new members (for all lists) joining at a rate of 2,500
per day. This estimate might be high because not
everyone joins a list, but I'm just generalizing here,
so please give me some leeway. This is ignoring the
rest of the world population and also ignoring the 250
million exiting drones. If we include them the
numbers would be much higher. Now I am here
participating which means I am hopeful that we could
someday reach that level, but I don't expect any real
change in the world until we do. The exact level is
debatable but I think you see my point.
Second, I mentioned above that we would need everyone
to ignore what someone has done to them. It is the
only way to defeat the planners who seek to create
strife and controversy. What is that famous quote
from Julius Ceaser? "Of course the people do not want
war....."
Third, I would like to see a reduction in laws.
People think we need laws to live, but I believe that
laws don't really stop anyone from doing anything,
they just determine guilt and punishment. If you have
many laws, it is a symtom of much lawlessness. Last
month a guy was licking women's toes on the beach in
europe somewhere (?) and there was no law to stop him,
so the law makers sprang into action. Give me a
break! When Clinton had his fling, the law makers
first reaction is to say there needs to be a law that
interns cannot have sex with their bosses. Come on,
give me a break! They forget that adultery is already
against the law!
Consider a simple traffic stop sign. The goal is not
really to get you to stop, the goal is to get you to
slow down and pay attention. In other words, you
could read a newspaper and stop your car at the stop
sign, then proceed into the intersection without
looking, and you have met the requirements of the stop
sign. The city planners know that they cannot
realistically pass a law that says you must pay
attention (although cellphone use is being banned in
more and more places). The stop sign is there to try
to get you to slow down, pay attention and also to
establish guilt once an accident occurs, ie. right of
way.
My friend and I were discussing stop signs, lawyers
and traffic accidents. He said "We NEED all these
laws and lawyers or else what happens when you have an
accident??" This attitude is a result of conditioning
and socialization and it is quite difficult to form a
vision out of the box of how it could be any other
way. My response was simply this. I asked him "How
would you handle it if you had the accident with your
father, or mother, or sister, or brother?". You see,
reasonably speaking, probably no lawyers, no phoney
whiplash, no lawsuits, no police, no jail. Of course
there are exceptions.
When the girl at the fruit stand gives me back too
much change, I give it back to her. I don't need a law
to do what is right for her. When the holiday bus is
full and people stand in the aisles for hours on the
trip up country, I stand up and rotate between 3 other
people for 15 minutes each. I don't need a law to
tell me to do that.
When the Bhopal disater hit, how would the corporate
response have been different if the victims were
family of the corporate officers?
How many Iraqiis would be dying if the US soldiers
considered them as their brothers? One would think
not too many.
In most cases the proper course of action can easily
be determined by asking yourselves "What if that was
my father, or mother, or sister, or brother?" . The
correct course of action will be fairly obvious. Laws
can never convey this simple but effective concept.
We currently believe that the more laws we have the
safer we are. I believe it is exactly the opposite.
In my opinion, we should be trying to create a society
in which people don't want to steal, don't want to
kill, don't want to commit suicide, don't want to
rape, don't want to divorce, don't want to go to war,
etc. How to do this? (Another thread?) When I see
people in our own society living without laws and
doing right for their neighbor, I believe it would be
possible to extend that to other countries. So first
treat your neighbor as your family, and then I believe
the foreigner will be next automatically. When I see
the existing hostilities between neighbors, I don't
think the foreigner can be treated as family (possible
but not the most likely scenario).
So Keith, I gave you the short version before when I
said trouble is inevitable. I don't really mean that.
What I mean is that I don't see the things in place
which would be necessary to allow us to work the
problems out. And getting those things in place first
so we can then solve all our problems will be next to
impossible. And I'm not angry about it. I just state
it the same way I say that 2+2=4 or it is cold outside
or whatever. Maybe I need to devlope a different
writing style so it doesn't appear that I am angry,
because I'm not.
Whew. Just my radical opinion and slightly off topic.
I'm done on this topic. It's been fun. Thanks to
all for posting.
Keith, of the list participants you are the first time
zone for the new year, so I would like to say HAPPY
NEW YEAR to you and Midori first, and then to all list
particpants as the earth spins around its axis at
around 1,000 mph and hurtles through space around the
sun at 600 km/sec, not to mention the motion of the
solar system around the galactic center or the
galaxy's motion through the universe to bring in the
new year.
Keith, Midori, Todd, Luc, Hakan, Robert, Kim, Kirk,
Phillip, Mike, CS and everyone else - HAPPY NEW YEAR!!
Good to know you all.
Best Regards,
Peter G.
Thailand
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail - now with 250MB free storage. Learn more.
http://info.mail.yahoo.com/mail_250
_______________________________________________
Biofuel mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/biofuel
Biofuel at Journey to Forever:
http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html
Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable):
http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/
