Pearls of Wisdom by Benito :)

A quote by Benito Mussolini:

"We become strong, I feel, when we have no friends upon whom to lean, or to look to for moral guidance"

Mussolini gave this quote most likely to illustrate his belief in how man must be strong in times when there is no one around for support. If Mussolini believed that man was his strongest emotionally when he has no friends around him for support and no other forms of moral guidance, it is easily interpreted that he was the father of fascism.



-SaraH*

Dictatorship by Stalin

TECHNIQUES OF A LEADER:
Josef Stalin?


Of the 5 main characteristics that are often possessed by a totalitarianism leader, Josef Stalin used extreme amounts indoctrination and education in schools to influence and modify his citizen’s beliefs and their values in everyday society.

Education is a weapon whose effects depend on who holds it in his hands and at whom it is aimed.

Stalin is noted as saying this quote that emphasis how he used education to persuade his people into following him. Education before the dictatorship of Stalin was free and quite expanded: in that it was rich with soviet citizens learning to read and write. It is important to note that once Stalin came along, there were fees established for secondary education in public schools. With the industrialization and heavy human losses due to the World War II and repressions the generation that survived under Stalin saw a major expansion in job opportunities, especially for women. T
his characteristic of a dictator is dark and quite deceitful when it comes to how the people might feel in the county. In such times of despair, it is natural for a human to give into the most absurd proposals or acts. Establishing fees to go to school would ultimately evolve into text-book readings on the leader, Stalin and all the techniques the country “should” look up to.





...deception..indoctrination..propaganda..force and terror..eliteism..racism..militarianism..

--SaraH*

Mistercarlsonia

Setting upa democracy on a new spit of land:


Some nations execute a very authoritarian style of government, while on the other hand, there are some places in which political decisions are heard and expressed by the people who reside there. On this island, however, the democratic set-up would have to have a balance between authoritative, controlling power by the government in general as well as a direct democracy in which the would have their own political say and opinions would be heard. On Mistercarsolina, Political decisions need to be made on behalf of the majority, with the minority in mind, because equality should be a very prominent value. It is so vital for everyone to feel heard and respected, and that’s why if the island were to employ very strict authoritarian rule, there would be people who would feel ignored and in some cases overpowered.
The democracy on this island, in my opinion should indefinitely be represented because the population will grow overtime, but it will also highlight the ability citizens have to go to the polls and let them represent the leader THEY wish to represent. This system, if it was employed on Mistercarsolina would allow for those minorities rights to be heard and hopefully respected.




what a beautiful location :)



--Sarah*

The Last Czar

“For the first time in history, a revolution is being engineered not from below but from above, not by people against their government, but by the government against the welfare of the people”

This statement is an excellent way of describing how the Russian revolution led by the people and the Bolsheviks changed the course of history and the life of Czar Nicholas II. It is through this quote that reveals the course of events that not only led up to the change, but also its consequence for the Czarist family. Democracy and government in Russia would never be the same again after the revolution and his advocacy, but, in turn, it is also important to remember all the momentous trials that took place. If these hadn’t existed, the fate of Russia being under the hands of a Czarist government wouldn’t have changed. When this quote is examined word for word, it is easy to distinguish that for the first time in history, a revolt by the people is being created from above the government, and BY the government against citizen welfare. In the context of this quote, it literally compares the way government was, to the way it has changed to be, and how this revolution differs from any other in history. When thought about this way, it only enhances how interesting this time period really is to study. The end of an era can only bring about new beginnings

--SaraH*

Media Paragraph

Restricting expression on the anonymous internet explorer?
Good luck… -.-

consider this:
*Would I, being a fairly devoted vegetarian, purposely visit a meat-obsessed website in my personal time then complain about being extremely offended? No, because I know that I would have to personally CHOOSE to visit a site that contrasts greatly to my value.


It is fascinating to think about how much the media affects what we, as the public, end up learning through pictures and articles published. How much editing a picture may go through, or how twisted a story may get it isn’t commonly thought about.

It is not true that we live under a human right that allows for free expression? Yet we continually complain everytime someone’s ideas clash with another. Groups that depict what THEY believe as right can be expressed anywhere at anytime, but publically it is limited or edited for content. It is also common for we, as society to regard extreme personal or group expression to be either egocentric or contrastingly annoying.

But what about the world-wide web? How much of a difference is there from surfing the web and find pictures or paragraphs on a subject than watching a news program full of pictures AND verbal words?? I would say not a huge amount of a difference.
When an individual posts their own beliefs on the World Wide Web, it is visible to anyone around the world at any time. The internet can be used in a threatening aspect, or a safer environmentt free from judgement. Should there even be any limitations to this anonymous and/or threatening way of posting personal ideas? In my opinion, I have never heard of a sole individual being forced to read, watch a newscast or visit a webpage that illustrates strong beliefs that directly contradict his or her own values.
People are aware of the many risks of the internet and all the potentially offending viewpoints that are freely posted out there, and in the end MAKE THEIR OWN CHOICES. Why should there be restrictions if people are grown-up enough to make decisions about what they view in their personal time? The internet is a great place to express your approach to a subject semi-anonymously.

Articles in newspapers or TV-repots must by monitor some what by head-stations, but the internet is an anonymous network of hundreds of millions of people expressing their own viewpoints. Should there be limitations into what I can post on this blog if I know that my opinion should, heaven-forbid, offend someone? No beacuse there are many people, including myself, who are well aware of how to be open-minded to the differentiating society we live in.
I think more people should learn how to go about living this way or deal with being offended quite frequently.

Even if restrictions were to exist, how would an individual or group of authoritative people go about successfully making sure people dont express too-personal issues? They could track the computer used, but then again, how many people could possibly use that computer? Fingerprinting? hmmm...good luck with that.
It all boils down to this: The internet is a tricky place to catch someone, and also convict them of offending someone, to begin with.


--SaraH*

The future and the gomery report

How will or future change?

The gomery Report:

These latest findings that have been posted on websites, newspapers and magazines worldwide regarding the Gomery inquiry will no doubt directly affect the future of Canada’s political system. Our own ruled system of democracy will change with regards to which political group is voted in. The findings of Justice Jean Gomery will make the voting turn-out and future be placed in the hands of the voters. The media will present the findings which will directly affect the general public.
In regards to the timing of the inevitable election, it seems that this decision is turning into an absurd debate that is highlighted everywhere by the media. The timing of whether or not the election should occur over the “Christmas season” or the early following spring is turning into a bigger issue than the reason for the election itself.
Many people see that having an election sooner than later would put the defending groups at a disadvantage because impending results and findings are still being discovered and talked about. Some see it as only being fair to wait for the next set of findings to be released to the public before an election should be held. I find this reason to be relatively fair, but in turn it also lengthens the amount of waiting time the taxpayers of this country must feel kept in the dark.
In regards to the election being held over the Christmas holidays, I find this top be an imprudent reason. More than half of the religions in Canada don’t celebrate the Christmas holiday.

If findings were substantial enough to call an election, and the government of Canada actually delayed it until the following spring because of one holiday and the day it covers, there is not much respect for the minority groups and their values.
The Liberal party and all of its members are indeed going to be viewed differently for many years to come. I think that they deserve to be scrutinized against based on the findings that have been presented. It is indeed part of human nature to make mistakes and hopefully learn from them, but this ‘mistake’ made by the liberals and quite possibly our own formal prime minister are more than substantial. This scandal had direct involvement from the Liberals and they shouldn’t try to hide that. It is their fault if they have cast a shadow over their party.
If I had a chance to vote, I would vote for the conservative party because of the stance they have taken against the Liberals and because of the strategies of resolution Steven Harper has proposed.


--SaraH*

The first post of the Gomery Inquiry

Insights of the inquiry:

I feel that the findings regarding the whole situation of the sponsorship scandal by Justice jean gomery either proves that Paul Martin was a horrible Finance minister, or he is hiding a horrible lie and will be caught. I feel, as a Canadian citizen, a bit abused in regards to my faith and trust in our political authoritative figures. In regards to the findings of Jean Chrétien and what HE is proposing to do to fight his side of what happened ermines me much of the controversy, and how one will avoid it, regardless of their status.

The most definite part of democracy that is being breeched with this whole investigation is the characteristic of accountability. The government should be accountable of all of their actions and what those actions may give to the citizens of society. Being responsible for your actions is the problem: it was never done. We as citizens find out about possible illegal practices by the government through investigations and privately monitoring the government’s actions. It has come to a point in which trust must be built back up to satisfy citizens. There should be more governments that are willing to be accountable and loyal to its members, and thus making us as citizens feel assured of where our money is going to.

Being a young Canadian citizen who will soon be allowed to vote, I will indefinatley follow this story closely and see how everything works out.

--SaraH*

ID scanning: prying privacy?

Private Information: there IS a benifit!

There is much debate over how much of our privacy is being violated when personal ID cards are scanned prior to entering night clubs, and how long this information is stored after one leaves.

Entering a facility and knowing that our own personal data and information is in a database, and kept for future use leaves many people feeling violated.

The questions everyone asks? Why should our address and phone number be kept in a data base that could bas accessed by anyone? Our personal information, many believe, should be kept private for the benefit of our needs and wants.
No one wants to give out personal information because of how it has been labeled to be kept classified. But, it isn’t often considered that through scanning ID’s and gaining the “personal information” that people are so hesitant g to give out could possibly keep us safe while enjoying our leisure time.

To what extent should companies such as Tanta go to keep their customers safe? Well I believe that performing ID scans in order to keep an accurate and useful record of who is entering the club is in direct benefit for society and all individuals. Keeping violent offenders out of the institutions we spend our free time should be seen as a positive step in decreasing the amount of violence that occurs frequently in society.
Do we not have our personal information logged when we book airplane flights or travel through airports? We are scanned and checked and evaluated by other authoritative figures for the safety of millions of people, yet no one really complains about that.

I personally cannot comprehend why so many people think it is a bad idea, when in reality it is a step that could prevent violence from even commencing in the first place.
For instance, if there was an episode of violence that took place in a nigh club, and someone was killed, how would the families of the victim feel if the killer got away and the police had no lead from where the murder occurred?
If the one killer were to have entered a club, had his/her ID scanned, the name would be in the database and could be accessed by police to successfully rule out all possible suspects that were present. Not only would there be some of relief for all those who witnessed the crime, but it would show responsibility and good planning by the company.

People tend to forget that ANY organized group that runs its own company and keeps personal information can abused the sole purpose of protecting its customers. We has a society must have some confidence in the companies we enjoy spending our Friday nights with. If you dont, then go somewhere else and feel less "violated" by not giving out your "personal data"

--SaraH*