Adbusters

To Be Or Not To Be

Will this generation hold its leaders accountable?

How fitting that the world’s leaders are gathered in Copenhagen, where they can ask themselves that proverbial Danish question: To be or not to be? A Greenpeace-sponsored campaign unveiled in the city this week presents a stark image of the negation. World leaders who chose not to be – not to be the ones who imposed firm limits on emissions, who initiated clean energy infrastructure, who stopped deforestation – apologize from the future for their failings. But what the campaign doesn’t address is us. Who are we to be? The generation that held its leaders accountable and catalyzed real, systemic change? Or the generation that chose not to be – and took the entire planet down with it.

Adbusters 111 Cover

On Newsstands December 3

At last we’re in Winter. It’s the year 2047. A worn scrapbook from the future arrives in your lap. It offers a stunning global vision, a warning to the next generations, a repository of practical wisdom, and an invaluable roadmap which you need to navigate the dark times, and the opportunities, which lie ahead.

Subscribe to Adbusters Magazine

44 comments on the article “To Be Or Not To Be”

Displaying 31 - 40 of 44

Page 4 of 5

Brian M.

Let's clarify that there are two tea party movements in America. One is a true anti-tax, pro-state, socially liberal and fiscally conservative movement of patriotic Americans willing to fight to free us from the economic kidnapping done by Wall Street. The other, sadly, has been hijacked by FOX news correspondents who are just trying to make an anti-Obama movement. This country isn't falling apart simply due to the executive orders of the President, the treaties he makes or the titles he assumes at the United Nations - it's due to corruption, bureaucracy, greed and a complete lack of fear of protesters. If you've been to the tea party protests and they feel kind of diluted and "disneyland-esque", that's because they are. They aren't real protests. The real protesting is going on in the home, not on the street. It's using weapons like buying Main Street products instead of Wall Street, buying wholesome delicious foods and divorcing corporate chemical grub, buying a couple of guns and stocking up on gold and silver. We have got to move this country in a more efficient direction and the tea party movement is where it starts.

Although I would rather it be called the "Off With Their Heads Movement", but that's one guy's opinion. =)

Brian M.

Let's clarify that there are two tea party movements in America. One is a true anti-tax, pro-state, socially liberal and fiscally conservative movement of patriotic Americans willing to fight to free us from the economic kidnapping done by Wall Street. The other, sadly, has been hijacked by FOX news correspondents who are just trying to make an anti-Obama movement. This country isn't falling apart simply due to the executive orders of the President, the treaties he makes or the titles he assumes at the United Nations - it's due to corruption, bureaucracy, greed and a complete lack of fear of protesters. If you've been to the tea party protests and they feel kind of diluted and "disneyland-esque", that's because they are. They aren't real protests. The real protesting is going on in the home, not on the street. It's using weapons like buying Main Street products instead of Wall Street, buying wholesome delicious foods and divorcing corporate chemical grub, buying a couple of guns and stocking up on gold and silver. We have got to move this country in a more efficient direction and the tea party movement is where it starts.

Although I would rather it be called the "Off With Their Heads Movement", but that's one guy's opinion. =)

Melby

"Make no mistake: Evil does exist in the world. A nonviolent movement could not have halted Hitler's armies. Negotiations cannot convince al-Qaida's leaders to lay down their arms," he told the crowd. Pres Obama

"Those who seek peace cannot stand idly by as nations arm themselves for nuclear war." Pres. Obama

Melby

"Make no mistake: Evil does exist in the world. A nonviolent movement could not have halted Hitler's armies. Negotiations cannot convince al-Qaida's leaders to lay down their arms," he told the crowd. Pres Obama

"Those who seek peace cannot stand idly by as nations arm themselves for nuclear war." Pres. Obama

N!

Respectfully, you're not understanding Nonviolence when you claim that Nonviolence would not be able to stop Hitler (read/link below). And Al-Queda's defeat has nothing to do with "negotiation," it has to do with building a society in which Al-Queda is obsolete (more on that below, too).

On "the Hitler question" specifically:

I don’t pretend that his is an uncommon mistake — I realize we’re all immersed in violence and it’s often difficult for us to see Nonviolence as POWERFUL – more powerful and more militant than violence. But please learn more about it. It’s so important.

Even the president of the U.S. used the same tired and unsupported argument in his defense and justification of violence (in his acceptance speech for the Nobel Peace Prize of all places). But Obama simply does NOT understand Nonviolence. Nonviolence DOES work.

Here’s a link to an interesting post with a little more info (from NonviolenceUnited.org)
http://www.nonviolenceunited.org/2009/12/what-about-hitler/

This isn’t about making a choice between helping people (by waging war where innocent people will die) or doing nothing — it is a question between helping people (via war) or helping people through Nonviolent means:

Offering food, building food infrastructure, schools, hospitals — truly helping people (what we tend to do only after we blow them to smithereens) is MUCH less expensive and MUCH more humanitarian than waging war. It builds lasting peace rather than setting ourselves up in this never-ending war.

I’m afraid this war is about the oil pipeline and about making a LOT of money for the war profiteers. There is a Nonviolent solution. War is obsolete.

All one.

N!

Respectfully, you're not understanding Nonviolence when you claim that Nonviolence would not be able to stop Hitler (read/link below). And Al-Queda's defeat has nothing to do with "negotiation," it has to do with building a society in which Al-Queda is obsolete (more on that below, too).

On "the Hitler question" specifically:

I don’t pretend that his is an uncommon mistake — I realize we’re all immersed in violence and it’s often difficult for us to see Nonviolence as POWERFUL – more powerful and more militant than violence. But please learn more about it. It’s so important.

Even the president of the U.S. used the same tired and unsupported argument in his defense and justification of violence (in his acceptance speech for the Nobel Peace Prize of all places). But Obama simply does NOT understand Nonviolence. Nonviolence DOES work.

Here’s a link to an interesting post with a little more info (from NonviolenceUnited.org)
http://www.nonviolenceunited.org/2009/12/what-about-hitler/

This isn’t about making a choice between helping people (by waging war where innocent people will die) or doing nothing — it is a question between helping people (via war) or helping people through Nonviolent means:

Offering food, building food infrastructure, schools, hospitals — truly helping people (what we tend to do only after we blow them to smithereens) is MUCH less expensive and MUCH more humanitarian than waging war. It builds lasting peace rather than setting ourselves up in this never-ending war.

I’m afraid this war is about the oil pipeline and about making a LOT of money for the war profiteers. There is a Nonviolent solution. War is obsolete.

All one.

Pages

Add a new comment

Comments are closed.