OT: 750 amendments

[Macrostructure]

You may remember that the G8 signed up to increase aid to Africa by $25 billion (but accidentally forgot to talk about fair trade).

Did you know that this $25 billion includes the $12 billion for debt relief already agreed before the summit?

Did you know that the USA has tabled 750 (seven hundred and fifty) amendments to the Gleneagles agreement for discussion at the coming UN summit. If 5% of these are ratified the agreement signed is worthless.

What the fuck is going on in the world? I ask you where are the Good People? How many ordinary people have to walk around with a hot knot of anger inside them for something to actually improve in this mess?

[rasputin]

Macrostructure, your righteous wrath at the inequities, stupidities and atrocities of the world are no doubt justified and mean a lot to you, but would it be too much to ask for you to go to those fora where they specialize in those sorts of things, and sort of reserve this one for things related to Ableton Live? OT posts are fine now and then--free speech and all--but you seem to be getting a little, shall we say, strident?

And not meaning to sound paternalistic, but I really would the Abletonian radicals to take my word for this: meaning no offense, but this feeling that the world has never been in worse shape than it is, that the current political leaders are the most corrupt and evil that ever were, etc, will take on some perspective after a good few years of studying history and living life.

As David Byrne remarked: "Same as it ever was."

r.

[Macrostructure]

Macrostructure, your righteous wrath at the inequities, stupidities and atrocities of the world are no doubt justified and mean a lot to you, but would it be too much to ask for you to go to those fora where they specialize in those sorts of things, and sort of reserve this one for things related to Ableton Live? OT posts are fine now and then--free speech and all--but you seem to be getting a little, shall we say, strident?

And not meaning to sound paternalistic, but I really would the Abletonian radicals to take my word for this: meaning no offense, but this feeling that the world has never been in worse shape than it is, that the current political leaders are the most corrupt and evil that ever were, etc, will take on some perspective after a good few years of studying history and living life.

As David Byrne remarked: "Same as it ever was."

r.

I undertand your point Rasputin, but there's a lot about at the moment to try and raise awareness of. AFAIK 'Off Topic' is a license to say what you like when you like.. I contribute plenty 'On Topic' as well in this forum.

Your cynical attitude does you no credit and your patronising tone will get you nowhere at all. You assume I am young and uneducated because I care enough to try and that says more about you than it does about me.

If you don't like it, don't read it.

[Tarekith]

This isn't really the right place for it man.

[Macrostructure]

This isn't really the right place for it man.

In addition to (and perhaps becuase of) making a significant contribution to the Ableton community via this forum and through the production and performance of live music using Live I think it is legitimate for me to make posts on important political topics marked 'OT' in the general forum of this site in order to more widely disseminate important data, data which simply does not penetrate mainstream media. You do not have to read them. They are clearly labelled. I post similar material on other activity-based forums that I contribute to and lively debate sometimes occurs. It is good. Traffic on this site is such that posts of no interest will drop off the bottom in a matter of hours. It's not offensive material, or even incorrect, as I do thorough research. I find some of the stupid slagging matches that regularly take place on here very annoying, but hey, that's the internet.

[The Offender]

in reality africa doesnt need foriegn aid, the country has the richest soil in the world, and can easily accomadate its population, what africa needs is for its leaders to utilize its rescources for itself rather than starve out their own people through beaurocracy. the same can b said for the usa, look at the hurricane aftermath, there were many people and private organizations and even other countries wanting to help, but the government (fema) turned it away.

helping needy people is not about the money, its about getting rid of the beaurocratic entanglement that keeps the help from getting there. whether its africa or new orleans its always the same story.

[Macrostructure]

in reality africa doesnt need foriegn aid, the country has the richest soil in the world, and can easily accomadate its population, what africa needs is for its leaders to utilize its rescources for itself rather than starve out their own people through beaurocracy. the same can b said for the usa, look at the hurricane aftermath, there were many people and private organizations and even other countries wanting to help, but the government (fema) turned it away.

helping needy people is not about the money, its about getting rid of the beaurocratic entanglement that keeps the help from getting there. whether its africa or new orleans its always the same story.

Surely a multi-headed approach is better? There are indeed areas of Africa that simply cannot support the population, due to climate change/drought/war. But part of that beurocratic entaglement you refer to is debt repayment, and that is tied in with aid, sadly.

[The Offender]

in reality africa doesnt need foriegn aid, the country has the richest soil in the world, and can easily accomadate its population, what africa needs is for its leaders to utilize its rescources for itself rather than starve out their own people through beaurocracy. the same can b said for the usa, look at the hurricane aftermath, there were many people and private organizations and even other countries wanting to help, but the government (fema) turned it away.

helping needy people is not about the money, its about getting rid of the beaurocratic entanglement that keeps the help from getting there. whether its africa or new orleans its always the same story.

Surely a multi-headed approach is better? There are indeed areas of Africa that simply cannot support the population, due to climate change/drought/war. But part of that beurocratic entaglement you refer to is debt repayment, and that is tied in with aid, sadly.

i guess what im trying to say is, there r some african countries that r better off than others, which means if one country is facing famine, there is another country that isnt, so y is it that food and aid to a starving country has to come from overseas rather than next door? africa needs new leaders, thats the problem, the world can give them all the money in the world, but it seems like not even one penny goes to helping anyone.

[the shoe]

This isn't really the right place for it man.

i think its good to get other musos opinions - their the alone people that have the power to influence and change people anyway

[Macrostructure]

in reality africa doesnt need foriegn aid, the country has the richest soil in the world, and can easily accomadate its population, what africa needs is for its leaders to utilize its rescources for itself rather than starve out their own people through beaurocracy. the same can b said for the usa, look at the hurricane aftermath, there were many people and private organizations and even other countries wanting to help, but the government (fema) turned it away.

helping needy people is not about the money, its about getting rid of the beaurocratic entanglement that keeps the help from getting there. whether its africa or new orleans its always the same story.

Surely a multi-headed approach is better? There are indeed areas of Africa that simply cannot support the population, due to climate change/drought/war. But part of that beurocratic entaglement you refer to is debt repayment, and that is tied in with aid, sadly.

i guess what im trying to say is, there r some african countries that r better off than others, which means if one country is facing famine, there is another country that isnt, so y is it that food and aid to a starving country has to come from overseas rather than next door? africa needs new leaders, thats the problem, the world can give them all the money in the world, but it seems like not even one penny goes to helping anyone.

Sure, there are, and they do, but the ability of the world's richest (8?) nations to help is actually many orders of magnitude greater, so they are asked to help, and do. There is massive corruption in African governments, a bit like in for example Italy and the USA too. And while African leaders must take their share of the blame for the (sometimes gross) mismanagement of their nations it is also the case that Western powers and banks have been exploiting African nations for hundreds of years and we have a moral responsibility to correct that. Furthermore, when faced with a daily crisis in Africa that dwarfs Katrina what is one supposed to do? Turn away and say "it's your own fault" when plainly it isn't as these poor folk in say The Congo have never even had the vote.
The incomprtence and corruption of their governments does not absolve us of our basic ethical duty to try and minimise suffering in the world. As rich nations that duty is heightened. Where did our money come from? Trade, often unfair trade with these exact countries.