Yes, maybe we are inherently ‘evil’, difficult to control and unpredictable, therefore we need to be ruled and governed to reduce conflicts.
No, we are all inherently good. It is the environment that corrupts us. We don’t need a government if the environment is good. Having a government restricts our freedom.
What do you think?
skip to main |
skip to sidebar
Categories
- 2009 (1)
- Announcements (12)
- Assessment (7)
- CA (12)
- Chapter 1 (5)
- Chapter 2 (2)
- Chapter 3 (4)
- Chapter 4 (2)
- Chapter 5 (5)
- Chapter 6 (3)
- Chapter 7 (3)
- Chapter 9 (1)
- Competitions (1)
- Field Trip (2)
- Help Desk (4)
- Lesson Slides (16)
- Manchu Mania (1)
- MCQ (1)
- Mock Exam (2)
- Movie Screening (2)
- o (1)
- Overseas Field Trip (2)
- Revision (3)
- SA1 (1)
- SA2 (6)
- Sample Submission (1)
- SBQ (17)
- SBQ Clinic (2)
- Seminars (3)
- SEQs (5)
- Study Hints (2)
- TfU Project (19)
- Videos (6)
Blog Archive
-
▼
2008
(40)
-
▼
July
(13)
- Chapter 5: Society
- Sec 1 History Continual Assessment
- Rubrics Part III - Oral History Interview
- Chapter 4 - Government
- Movie Screening - Hotel Rwanda
- Do People Need to be Governed?
- TfU Project - Part II Submission Requirements
- Oral History Interview
- TfU Project - Rubrics for Part 1
- Chp 3 - Birth of Civilisations
- Chp 2 - Reconstructing History
- TfU Project - History, Harmony, Heritage and Me
- TfU Project - History, Harmony, Heritage and Me
-
▼
July
(13)
Counter
Powered by Blogger.
Posts
(c) VS Sec 1 History Some Rights Reserved
51 comments:
I feel that if we live in a society that is willing to work together in a peaceful and harmonious manner for the benefit of the entire community, there is no need for a government. However, we are all humans, we cannot build up such a perfect society as there will always be those who seek power, those who seek wealth, those who want more than the rest. Thus we need a government to keep things in order. However, the government is also made out of people, that is when a system like democracy is put to use, so that the country can be run for the community's benefit.
Daniel Kong (10)
1A
I totally agree wif DK
Joseph Wong,1A
No,
The need of a gorverment depends on the type of people. If the society comprises mainly "good" people, then the need of a goverment will be less, maybe even non-exixtant, due to the fact that the people would not require a higher order to make and enforce decisions, especially if they dislike the disicion.Also,laws, usually made and enforced by goverments, will also be required to a lesser extend as the people themselves will help each other apprehend any criminals
If the society is evil, then the people who make up the goverment will come from the evil society, and so would themself be evil, and so do more harm then good.
Jia Peng 1A,
i totally disagree with both of joseph and daniel kong and the rest that follows because like what in Animal Farm, the animals were good, hardworking, etc. the only evil animals in Animal farm were the one who assume power and dominence of Animal farm which is a bunch of good for nothing pigs and it is them that needs to be governed. when they get hungry for power they would get corrupted, self cented and even destructive.
Only evil totally evil persons need to be strictly governed! we can afford to let good people running around the streets but we can't let gangster and terrorist destroing everything that is in the street.
so therefore, i say that good people who makes up the majority gains freedom no government to governed them. As for the Evil people we should just extriminate them to save good people from getting corrupted by just gorverning some baddies.
conclusion:good people does not need to be governed whileevil people need to get governed but might as well extriminate them so the government who govened the evil people can slack and sooon they would became bad and gets their head lopped off.
Final conclusion:
government would become bad one day so why is there a need of government. so there is no need of people governing people thats what some famous politician(government)
says:equality, peace, justice,globalization.so how can we do all that when there is government creating wars there are high rank and low rank,evil people released after some years.
final final conclusion:erm people should not be governed provided if they do not go bad or else they had to kiss their heads goodbye.
Jia Peng 1A,
i totally disagree with both of joseph and daniel kong and the rest that follows because like what in Animal Farm, the animals were good, hardworking, etc. the only evil animals in Animal farm were the one who assume power and dominence of Animal farm which is a bunch of good for nothing pigs and it is them that needs to be governed. when they get hungry for power they would get corrupted, self cented and even destructive.
Only evil totally evil persons need to be strictly governed! we can afford to let good people running around the streets but we can't let gangster and terrorist destroing everything that is in the street.
so therefore, i say that good people who makes up the majority gains freedom no government to governed them. As for the Evil people we should just extriminate them to save good people from getting corrupted by just gorverning some baddies.
conclusion:good people does not need to be governed whileevil people need to get governed but might as well extriminate them so the government who govened the evil people can slack and sooon they would became bad and gets their head lopped off.
Final conclusion:
government would become bad one day so why is there a need of government. so there is no need of people governing people thats what some famous politician(government)
says:equality, peace, justice,globalization.so how can we do all that when there is government creating wars there are high rank and low rank,evil people released after some years.
final final conclusion:erm people should not be governed provided if they do not go bad or else they had to kiss their heads goodbye.
Jia Peng 1A,
i totally disagree with both of joseph and daniel kong and the rest that follows because like what in Animal Farm, the animals were good, hardworking, etc. the only evil animals in Animal farm were the one who assume power and dominence of Animal farm which is a bunch of good for nothing pigs and it is them that needs to be governed. when they get hungry for power they would get corrupted, self cented and even destructive.
Only evil totally evil persons need to be strictly governed! we can afford to let good people running around the streets but we can't let gangster and terrorist destroing everything that is in the street.
so therefore, i say that good people who makes up the majority gains freedom no government to governed them. As for the Evil people we should just extriminate them to save good people from getting corrupted by just gorverning some baddies.
conclusion:good people does not need to be governed whileevil people need to get governed but might as well extriminate them so the government who govened the evil people can slack and sooon they would became bad and gets their head lopped off.
Final conclusion:
government would become bad one day so why is there a need of government. so there is no need of people governing people thats what some famous politician(government)
says:equality, peace, justice,globalization.so how can we do all that when there is government creating wars there are high rank and low rank,evil people released after some years.
final final conclusion:erm people should not be governed provided if they do not go bad or else they had to kiss their heads goodbye.
srry i accidentally spam but never mind right?
I agree to Joseph and Daniel Kong.But not fully with daniel kong.
The importance of the government depends fully on the community of people you are living with.If the community we are living in is harmonious and peaceful as Daniel has said, then there will be no need for a government. However,there is no need for the humans to be perfect which daniel has stated. I will give an example later. Carrying on, there will always be people who seek for power, wealth, or who want 'something more'... in a bad way. At times like this, Animal Farm( the book of course) really makes you understand more about whether people need to be governed.
Lets take it from the animals point of view.Almost all the animals were in perfect harmony and unity. However, the government became so corrupt as the pigs started to adopt the bad human habits together with dominence and power.And because of that, the whole rebellion was a total failure. This is another case which shows the results of an inefficient government. Now,Lets take it from a russian's point of view about 80 year's ago.
The Civil war broke about around the 1920s and it brought death and suffering to millions of people regardless of their political orientation.This was because the people were unhappy with the government and the way they ruled A rebellion leaded by trotsky then took place.Later on, the revolution( a successive rebellion) was succeeded and socialism(Meaning that all people became equal) was brought forward.This people won't exactly perfect,yet without a government, they could live happily. From then onwards, the Russians lived happily and the country was renamed USSR. However, their happy lives became unhappy after a government greedy for power was later on started once more. This shows the bads of the government.
However, if we take the government of singapore for an example, we all know that the government is very non corruptive and organised.It also ensures that most people have jobs, makes sure that charities don't cheat people of their money, make sure people pay their taxes and is efficient enough to make sure that most singapore residents live in peace.
The first example about the Russians and civil war shows an inefficient government which is seeking for power.
The second example about the singaporeans present day and the government shows an efficient government which ensures that the people can live in a good way.
So the overall idea is that, if the people can be harmonious and united, they do not need a government.The government can also be made out of people, that is when a system like democracy is put to use, so that the country can be run for the country's benefit itself like Daniel kong has stated.
But if they can't, they probably need a ' not greedy for power' government to settle things for them.
The reason why the government must not be greedy for power is that if that is so, the entire country will become corrupt, and will just quarrel too much between themselves that it won't be even qualified to be a country
Yes
I think that people naturally need to be governed because there will always be leaders and followers.
I do not see how people can come together and move forward if there is no one to take the lead. If everyone had different ideals and refused to take other perspectives, we would all just sit and simmer in our own enclosed space.
Taking democracy as an example, parliament exists so that members of parliament can bring up different viewpoints. These are then argued on and a conclusion is reached. Thus people move forward.
As a conclusion, I think that we do need to be governed, but I feel that the people being governed need to have a say in who is governing them. Democracy is my natural choice.
i pesonally feel that people should be governed by a group of elite people with critical thinking skills,good leadership qualities and most imporatly this shoould group of elite people should care about the people that they are governing . why should people be governed ? why cant the have the freedom they deserve? there are many questions to this . the answers to these questions i personally feel are:
1. people should be governed because this ensures a peaceful and well controlled environment we are living in .
2. people should be governed because although there are many people out there who are good and well behaved and mannered , but there is also a group of people who are quite different and thus these people need to be governed .
3.if we are not able to build up a perfect society shouldnt we give it a try or at least put in some effort to make our living place a much better one ?
As i have mentioned above a government should be made out of a group of elite people we should give them a chance to show us their abilities . on the other hand as citizens we should also lend a helping hand by contributing ideas on how we feel is able to mprove the environment we are living in and we could even give our opinions on the ideas that the government has proposed ........
Teo Zi Xiang 1A (38)
I personally feel that if a government did not exist, there would be chaos throughout the world.
Yes, I agree that sometimes people do not like and do not abide by rules, but without leaders, where would our country, Singapore be?
As said, there cannot be a perfect society as it is natural for conflicts to arise as not all people can get along. There will surely be the so called 'rich' class that will try to manipulate the poor, so we need the government to lead us,nurture future leaders and lead the country.
Jason Koh (17)
1A
Well, I think that without a government, that will be a chaos. The only time when a counrty requires a government is when the people are not in much order, where there are chaos happening etc as the importance of a government is to rule the counrty, keep all citizens of the country in order and also to lead the country, guiding them what is right and wrong. Well, if only all citizens are all together as one, united, no conflicts between each other, I am sure that there is not a need for a presence of goevernment.
Personally, I think that it is better for a country to have ruler and a government in order to keep things in order and guide people onto the right path. In reality now, I don't see a reason how people are able to be united without the government. Just take the famous litreature"Animal Farm" for an example. Before rebilion between animals and human took place, there was an agreement between the animals of not killing each other, however, after some time, the animals seemed to forget about the agreements earlier on and they instead did not follow but did what they should not do. Before, rebilion took place, animals are united as one, no confilcts between one another, but shortly after they had rebelled, chaos took place. So, with this, I agree that people need to be governed in order to have a perfect, well ruled country!!!
I agree with Jia Peng. Government is needed to control such people. However, the difference between plain good and bad is not so simple as different people have different views of what is right and wrong. Do we immediately say that a person is "evil" beacause he commited a crime? why did he do it, was he forced to?
Well said, DK !!!
I feel that the answer depends on how the country is as one.
If the country is corrupted, with a high-crime rate, then someone is to be the leader and give orders, keep the place in perfect order and make up some rules to prevent cases such as crime from happening. However, the citizens will feel very restricted and have no liberty. Hence, they make start riots and go against the Government. Though its for their own good that someone takes charge and handles matters of the country, the citizens may not like their government, hence rebel against them.
There is one more thing to consider, what if the Government could not handle or control the country? Then, the country would be a total mess and fall apart. The Government may be able to handle most issues, but others may not think so.
Hence, its according to what different people think. Some approve, while others object. Still, since the world and its countries are doing so well with Governments, WHY NOT JUST CARRY ON?
Lie Wen (21)
1A
Low Zhi Hao(1A)
Yes, people need to be governed as there are always some evil and bad people around, trying to do bad things. So there is a need for government as the evil and bad people needs to follow the laws or they will get pinished.
Zhi Hao(1A)
There is a spelling mistake in the comment, it should be punished instead of pinished.
I personally feel that in a evil society, a gorvenment is useless as the gorverment comes from the evil society itself, and so , would be evil. Even if the country the gorvernment rules is "democratic", The evil gorverment will simply threaten , bribe and intimidate the others to remain in power.Also, the laws the gorverment make will be corrupt,and will only benefit the leaders, and not the people,causing more good then harm.
sorry, i meant more harm than good.
Do we need a “government”?
Posted in Of The People by R Lee Wrights on May 21st, 2007
by Ed Lewis
courtesy of Kevin Tuma“To be governed is to be watched, inspected, spied upon, directed, law-driven, numbered, regulated, enrolled, indoctrinated, preached at, controlled, checked, estimated, valued, censured, commanded, by creatures who have neither the right nor the wisdom nor the virtue to do so.”
- Pierre-Joseph Proudhon’s book entitled “General Idea of the Revolution in the Nineteenth Century,” 1851
What would Mr. Proudhon write today if he saw a country with possibly the strongest military force in the world headed by a man who is a warmongering idiot capable only of mouthing the words that his controllers want him to stick with? Get real. Any person who promotes and wants war in this day and age of government weapons of mass destruction has to be a complete idiot. And, off course, the word “headed” is used loosely as the man doesn’t actually “head” the nation - he is just the head of the Executive Branch of government. At least, that is how it is supposed to be.
Govern is an interesting concept, especially since most people mistakenly believe it is the job of the government to govern the people. From the American Heritage Dictionary, we find:
Govern - (transitive verb) 1. To make and administer the public policy and affairs of; exercise sovereign authority in. 3. To control the actions or behavior of: Govern yourselves like civilized people. (My emphasis)
We also find in this dictionary the many definitions for “government”.
“Government - 1. The act or process of governing, especially the control and administration of public policy in a political unit. 2. The office, function, or authority of a governing individual or body. 3. Exercise of authority in a political unit; rule. 4. The agency or apparatus through which a governing individual or body functions and exercises authority. 5. A governing body or organization…” as:
Any American who loves the concept and practice of “liberty” should be scared to the very core of his being when government moves beyond its authority and does not adhere to the dictates of the true governing body - the sovereign people - resulting in a “ruling” body over people.
This is a hard concept to grasp but originally the American people - or any free people - are not governed by outside sources other than their Creator. Each in a free society governs himself. Because each of the people governs himself does not mean there is the absence of any form of political authority resulting in disorder and confusion or lacking in any cohesive principle or anarchy.
If we do not understand or come to understand that the sovereign - the people - have the responsibility of self rule based on the laws of God - the cohesive principles - while men forming the government are delegated only to protect this right of God given self-determination (political authority), liberty will not exist in this country - at least for 95 percent or more of the population.
Affect the laws of self-rule and any semblance of a Republic is lost to the emerging dictatorship or oligarchy government being created by those who would undermine liberty.
Because we have lost the concept of “liberty” to tyrannical legislation that has changed our constitutional government to sovereignty resting in elected officials and others, we have essentially allowed our country to be overthrown by greedy, lustful, and immoral persons lacking in integrity.
Now we have this power-mad person in the Oval Office making statements such as this one: “Thousands of trained killers are plotting to attack us,” to which he added, “this terrible knowledge requires us to act differently.”
Well, he is right about one thing - thousands of trained killers are planning to attack us. But it is the source of these thousands that are not mentioned by him, his staff, or his controllers. The thousands are those of the different levels of government who now have the primary goal of enforcing de facto laws that, in fact, do not apply to the sovereign. And, now more de facto laws are being added to “justify” terrorist actions by law enforcers.
This man - biologically speaking, anyway - has also on many occasions used one of his favorite propaganda (lies, in other words) phrases - protecting the freedoms against those who hate the freedoms we in America have.
What a pea-brain. One cannot protect the rights of people by removing the rights of people. When are the brain-dead majority of the American people going to wake up to this fact? When are the brain-dead going to come to realize that the people who hate freedom are not those of foreign origin, except when one acknowledges the District of Corruption as being foreign.
The functions given the federal and state governments are to uphold the Constitution and provide protection against those who would invade our shores and/or infringe upon our rights. Is this what the current and past administrations have done?
Is this what your state and local governments have done?
If you have any inkling of what is going on, you know the answers to these questions is “no, rights have not been protected but have been infringed upon by every level of government.”
So, you see, we are not having our freedom threatened by foreign countries - we are being threatened by the very organizations that are supposed to provide protection against infringement upon rights, whether from a foreign or domestic source. And, just as the bush man said, we should behave differently but not the way he means.
Friends - and at least 95 percent of the thousands of people the writer has known during his life - internalized certain values, including those of respecting the rights and property of others - along with working for what one gets. Integrity was instilled in us by family, friends, other peers, and only in a small way by the threat of “getting caught”. In fact, people I have been closest to did not consider the possibility of jail as the block to harming another. The usual reason for avoiding doing something to harm another person was “it’s wrong”.
Thus, one might say there were clear-cut lines of “right” and “wrong”. But, what of now?
Here we have an administration - all the clods in government regardless of level of government or of position within the government - that openly and flagrantly takes the property of others under some guise or another. By property is meant not only one’s land, buildings, automobiles, trucks, and money, but also his right to determine how to best live his own life for maximum enjoyment.
The government does this not only domestically but in other countries as well. If a country has oil that is blocked from US oil interests, then the answer is to change the government of the country (kill the leaders in opposition to US Government’s intents) and put a person or group in place that will go along with oil interests backing and/or in the US Government.
Let’s turn the clock back for a moment. People managed their own affairs. What government there was small and non-intrusive on the people. The laws to obey were the laws of God. If one transgressed on the rights of another, the people made the judgment as to redress being due and what the redress was.
Most of the people settling this country had had enough of tyranny and lack of freedoms concerning spiritual beliefs and not being able to live as free men. Or, maybe they wished to start a new life with everything they could gain through their own hard efforts was theirs and theirs alone.
Eventually, enough in each of these colonists believed strongly in separating themselves from the rule of England headed by King George III. They had a long list of grievances never resolved by the King. Hence, the Declaration of Independence was written and separation from England declared. The right to do so was fought for - and won (even though some try to convince people we are still under English rule).
Each colony in becoming a State maintained its sovereignty over the other states and, most important, the centralized government. Certain functions were given the central government which can be boiled down to two - defend the shores of the states against all invasions, whether foreign or domestic, and to uphold the Constitution thereby protecting the Christian and God-given rights, whether enumerated or not, of the people.
The central government’s jurisdiction was limited to the District of Columbia and territories. Each state’s jurisdiction was limited to the confines of the State but could not infringe upon the rights of the people. The duty of the government established for the State was to uphold the Constitution and defense. Thus, the people were sovereign over the central government, each individual state government, and each man and woman was sovereign to each other.
Now, one might wonder as we have seen the Constitution and the rights of man destroyed by the anti-Christian (including Ashcroft - he’s a fake Christian), anti-patriot forces in all levels of government exactly the necessity for a government if the government is intent on infringing upon human rights. Or, asking in another fashion, if government makes laws that infringe on the rights of even one man or woman, then is it not an anti-constitutional act, which must fall into the category of treason? We must ask then - do we need treasonous governments?
Consider for a moment the purpose for weapons of mass destruction. Better yet, consider why they are even developed. Is it for defense? And, if so, why is such defense a necessity? Is it because the people in one country want to destroy the people in another country? Or, is it because leaders of countries want something some other country has?
While considering this, also think about this. The people in this country are being told that Muslims (first, it was just Islamics hated but it spread to include all Muslims) hate Americans because of their freedoms. We are a Christian nation founded on Christian principles so the “alleged” conflict between the two religions is often brought up - you know, the old religious war thing. But, if this is so, why have Christians and Muslims lived in peace for centuries in Egypt with the only expulsion being Jews?
To bring up another relevant point, let’s say you are on a picnic with many of your family and friends on the 4th of July. There are several other groups, one of which is close enough for you to see what they have. Now, let’s say the group has an item of food or drink your group doesn’t have. Is your first inclination to think - “Hey, let’s go over there and take their food that we don’t have”?
A bunch of us were having a military group picnic on one of the beaches In Okinawa. Near to us was an Okinawan wedding party. Well, a couple of the kids smelled our roasting hot dogs and saw us roasting marshmallows, something this group had not seen before. The kids wanted some so a couple of us that knew a few words went to talk to the adults and see if it was okay.
It was and we worked out a mutually beneficial trade. They shared their Okinawan food and drink with us and we shared ours with them. Quite a deal.
The point is that neither group wanted to attack the other to get what they had. We ended up having a great afternoon and evening sharing food, drink (saki for bourbon and beer) and many laughs in spite of the language barrier. It is still one of my fondest memories for the past 36 or 37 years (I was either 19 or 20 at the time).
There was no “government” to tell us how to behave. All that governed us were our respect for other people.
The founders of this country preached and practiced non-interference with other nations, just as most of us preach non-interference with other people. We were at peace with the world as long as this doctrine was upheld, just as we remain at peace with other people when we do not interfere with their rights. Other countries that were open to visitors accepted us, including those in the Middle East, now alleged by government to be the “deadly” enemies of our freedom (excepting Israel).
Our colonists who became the American people lived and traded with each other and other countries without any bad feelings developing that would have resulted in wars being declared. Trades for goods were worked out. Even though most of the world’s people were armed, arms were not used to take what they wanted. Governing bodies have always done this, not the people.
Not so now. American foreign policy today is nothing more than “Hey, you back my aggressive war-like actions against such and such country since we (my financial backers and companies I am associated with) need its resources and I will make sure you get my backing (or money) in your aggressions against such and such country.” Or - “Don’t back us and we will assure you will be boycotted or bombed back to the Stone Age.”
Name a war that was not instigated by a government rather than the people. Next, prove that the war was not the result of persons in government - or those who supported government financially, meaning major industrialists and bankers - wanting something that another country had and for the lust for power and control over other people.
Without centralized governments, People, I fervently believe that all people, regardless of country of origin, would be much further down to the road to world peace. It is always leaders, whether political, religious, military or a combination of these that starts wars. They are NOT started by the people who want only to live their lives in peace.
Thus, war machinery and weapons are developed for the governments to provide defense for themselves, not for the people. The US Government does everything to protect itself, not the people. Read for example, the final paragraph is EO 12333 issued by Reagan. And when you do, remember the United States is only the District of Columbia and United States Citizens are “artificial persons” under the jurisdiction of the US Government. This does not include the people of the many States.
The US Government protects itself because of the many invasions this country has made into the private affairs of other countries. It uses the people to defend its actions by promoting “patriotism” and “defending freedom”. Invariably, when the bottom line cause for the attacks on other people is revealed, the reason is without fail related to major industrialists, especially defense contractors, oil suppliers, illegal drugs, and bankers that influence to the extent they effectively own the US Government.
If this country’s central government had never began interfering in the affairs of others - including the States that seceded from the union -there would have not been any need for probably 95 percent of weaponry developed. Effort and resources could have been directed to improvement of mankind, including lawful birth control methods, rather than control and destruction.
If the assumed elite - but gutter scum scoundrels to me - had not wanted to control the oil and drugs in the Middle East and to aid Israel militarily and to the tune of billions of dollars a year in aide and equipment, there would not be any terrorist actions by Middle Eastern people against any American.
If the gutter scoundrels - elite to them - had not wanted, as another example, to control the oil and drugs in Central and South America, there would not be any of our people covertly - and occasionally overtly - killing leaders of other countries who do not go along with the present politico/military/industrialist coalition of the federal government.
Damn, People, put yourselves in the shoes of the other people. How would you feel if suddenly a bunch of Chinese (and they far out number us) started invading your towns and cities, killing leaders and others at will because they decided Texas or California rightfully belonged to Mexico or because they wanted control of - darn, can’t think of a product I know is 100 percent American made - anyway, something we have they don’t? Wouldn’t you get rather upset and try to take acts of retribution against them as a freedom fighter?
Now, consider this. Do you hate other people because your first conscious thought of them was “I hate them” or were you taught to hate, primarily based on false information?
It is my contention that without learning to the contrary one does not care about races, religions, or anything else that keeps people separate. (You are welcomed to prove hate for a specific type of person or belief is innate in people.) If one learns based on false information, then what is learned is false. The government knows this very well. Thus, its words against Middle Eastern people - especially Muslims of the Islamic persuasion -excepting Israel which uses the same sort of hostile actions as the Palestinians. The difference in terminology at to ‘terrorism” or “freedom fighters” - none except the US Government seems to want to be partners in crime with Israel.
Is all the false information about other countries because of and controlled by the US Government? You can bet your sweet bippy it is. It is called divide and conquer. Besides, regular everyday people haven’t the need to run a propaganda campaign to justify its attacks on other countries. Regular people could give a healthy crap about what people in other countries are doing.
To date, events credited to terrorists in this country were found to be - or highly suspected - works orchestrated by the federal government (including massive cover-ups) as tools to establish the New World Order and domestic tyranny over the American people. The actions, along with wars, conflicts, and covert actions by the US Government, have also been used - at least since the build up to the Civil War - to instill fear in our people, to get the brain-dead to go along with removal of rights, and to cause fervor for the unconstitutional attacking of other people.
Here is a rule of thumb. Anytime the government balks at or blocks independent investigations - or threatens people to keep their mouths shut - or suddenly one who is whistle blowing is killed under questionable circumstances - you can safely bet there was federal involvement in the act of terrorism or that a proper agenda would expose its hidden agendas. Good God, People, common sense ought to tell you that. But, alas and deep sigh - government schools are also wiping out common sense.
As a final observation of recent declarations by the Bush crowd of evildoers, how often have you been at a family gathering, a meeting of some sort, or at other functions with several people present where the topic became “You know, we people need to wipe out the government in Mexico. I heard some of the people there have arms and they could use them against us someday. So, we need to change its government. Joe, why don’t you and a few of your elite killers go down there and take care of that SOB that let his people have guns. It may someday attack us and we should do it first. Let’s take them out. And, don’t worry about any innocents killed - we’ll just call them ‘collateral damage’.”
Or, have often have you thought - “Hmm, my neighbor bought a firearm. I think I had best get rid of him before he uses it against me.”
Sounds ridiculous doesn’t it? Well, that is exactly the reasoning of the US Government, with the focus currently on Iraq, a country our treasonous government wants to attack come hell or high water. It will then be followed by attacks on maybe 60 more countries, unconstitutional military operations that are going to make a few tons of money for defense, oil, and pharmaceutical interests, all of which are tied in extensively with the present administration. The truth in this is, of course, hidden from a dummied down American who believes anything any corrupted SOB in government or its media puppets tells them.
Shoot, if I were another country, I would be preparing to the utmost of my country’s ability or other sources to get weapons not to attack America, but to defend against being attacked by it. So would all Americans. Say, wasn’t that originally the concept behind government weapons development we were told - to DEFEND, not attack.
Furthermore, do people sit around saying we have to have the oil in such and such country? Not hardly. Most people don’t even know where the gas they fill their cars comes from. Ask them. Shoot, ask the place you buy your gas. Only the oil soaked US Government says this.
Most people I know talk about why the federal government has blocked extremely highly efficient alternate energy measures to petroleum or blocked vastly improved, highly efficient systems (300 to 400 miles per gallon in some cases or no petroleum derived fuels at all) for the past 40 years.
How about drugs and their legalization? Now, before you answer, get the facts, primarily the facts concerning recreational use BEFORE government intervention and its push for getting people addicted compared to the number of users today. And, try to find out how much money has been made by the federal government after forcing through armed acts of terrorism unconstitutional drug control measures on the people.
Then, answer the question of why countries the US Government intervenes in either have oil, natural gas sources, produce large quantities of controlled drugs, especially cocaine, or a combination of the three and - simultaneously - has a government blocking US interests.
I believe that without centralized governments acting as the governing authority, the majority of the world would be living in peace. I believe it is the destiny of Mankind to do so. There will always be exceptions. No matter what those of the one world government is shoving down your throat, peace does not come at the end of a gun just because one group holds all the guns (the UN).
Peace comes when all people respect the rights of all other people. Only the evil people directing and controlling centralized governments and their horrendous desire for increased wealth and power have caused major world unrest. History bears this out.
My faith is that all people on Earth - regular everyday people - can live in peace and overall harmony but my reality tells me it will never come to pass as long as evil fills or controls governments, whether the governments are based on political, religious, military, or a combination. It is that evil we must direct our attention to, not what the evil tells us to believe.
Thus, my conclusion is we need a central government for two reasons - to uphold the Constitution and to defend the God-given rights of Man. In both, the current government - I should say “dumb-ya’s administration” since Congress and the Supreme Court is filled with cowards and traitors to their oaths of office - is failing miserably. It is acting as an invader, committing treason by the hour by conducting acts of terrorism against the people of this country.
Thus, we would be better off - and certainly more secure - without it.
We can simply govern ourselves “like civilized people” - the way it is supposed to be.
I feel that no matter what, having a government is still the best as we all need people to lead us sometimes. Even if the society we live in is willing to work together in a peaceful and harmonious manner, the govenment will act as a role model for the people. Without a govenment, the society might not be "bad", it might still flourish but it might not be so "good" either. Thus I feel that having a govenment is better.
Joejyn Wan(16)
1A
[Before you read this, first read my first commment]I feel awkward that most of you are jumping into conclusions that governments are important.Well of course they are important in some occasions. Now, lets compare first and third world nations. First world nations are more advanced into technology, well more advanced... First world nations however are not and thousands maybe millions of people from first world nations are suffering... Thats because they have a poor government whereas first world nations have a better "out standing", efficient government. This shows that governments can be both bad & good but it reallys depends on the government itself. Well now you can say that third world nations are third world nations because the people are not harmonious,etc. but if that's so, an efficient government would be able to ' counter ' that and resolve the problem unless its too disastrous which is !gone case!. So i conclude that government is important or important mostly based on their attitude and their people's attitude.
Now heres an example. We students are the people of a country and our teacher ( In 1A's case its Mr Donald Leo)is the government. Lets take it like this to promote the government. When he is not in class, we do all sorts of "FUNKY" stuff. But the moment he comes into the room, we are little angels.(NOT) That shows that a government can really be effective.A negative to the government now for eg. is that a teacher can teach us bad stuff.
But overall i think a government of course helps in a huge way sometimes to even stop racial riots(Today's racial harmony day).
i feel that we are both influenced and born greedy. from young, once we know numbers, we would somehow want the bigger number, even if you dont know what you are going to get. isnt that born greedy? and when people ask you :do you want 10 dollars or 5? and people say: take ten dollars! even if you dont know the value of money, you will get influenced and take the 10 dollars. so, isnt that both nature and nurture?
I agree with Jeojyn, people are greedy not because they born greedy or being influence to become greedy. People become greedy beacuse they are both born greedy and influenced by the others. Although people always want to get the better things, it could be prevented when they are young. But most people around them are greedy(almost everyone is greedy)and little children become more greedy then they usesd to be. As they become parents they influence their child/children with greediness but not stop them from being greedy
Why are Man greedy?
I think it is beacause we were born like that. Of course, we can start off by using the Channel 5 show, Deal or No Deal as an example. Already, $100 to anyone is a lot, but in the show, everyone wants the quater of a million. They go on and on, trying to reach a reasonable yet high offer or try their luck to see if the case they picked contained the huge sum. In the end, or the end of the series, no even ONE contastant got the quater of a million, and most of them on sums about a few thousand. Why did they get this small amount? They were greedy. They wanted a HUGE sum, and kept going on. Hence, they pushed their luck too much while greed overtook their common sense.
Wealth is not the only thing people greed over. We greed for POWER. Why do wars start? Because people want to claim for things for themselves, such as land and agriculture, and hence fight with other innocent villagers or cities. This results in unhappiness, even for both parties.
We can also refer to Animal Farm. Napoleon, the farm's new leader, had so much power, he took advantage of it. He broke the rules, and even CHANGED it to cover up for himself. He traded for whisky instead of helping out the farm. Since he is the leader, and did not do a very good job, the whole farm was a total mess and fell apart. He did everything for himself, not sparing a thought for anyone, and THAT is the result. We can conclude that there are also consequences for being greedy for power.
One last point is that ALL OF US ARE GREEDY (even me? haha). There are some of us who think they are generous, such as returning lost money or valuables, or buying your friends a meal, but inside, do you feel a sense of regret? Do you feel a voice saying,"Maybe I should keep this, is anyone looking?" or "Why can't he buy himself a meal? He has his own money!" Do you help out because you want to get commended by Mr Chia or any other teachers? Or do you help out because you want the other person to return the favour next time in future? WHAT IS YOUR MAIN PURPOSE? If you are really a generous person, then wouldn't you be donating blood, money, time, ORGANS (in the LEGAL way, of course)?
Man are greedy, in every way. The word "generousity" is a word meaning to WILLINGLY giving things, BUT ARE YOU REALLY WILLING TO?
Lie Wen (21)
1A
Response to Joejyn:
Well said, humans are indeed born greedy.
There is one point you sould take note of:
$10 or $5?
Well, if you only need $5 to lets say buy a meal or smething, then isn't just $5 enough? If you want to take over a tribe, You only need a stronger tribe, you dont need the WHOLE WORLD to go against them. It depends but some people will think:
$10 is too little...
What if they have a huge army too? I'll sent the whole world!
My conclusion is that sometimes being GREEDY does not need to be a BIG issue. Even the smallest issue on bring greedy means you are in fact, G R E E D Y!!!
Lie Wen (21)
1A
In my opinion, the environment we are in currently plays a major part in us being 'greedy' or 'evil'.
People are well infuenced by their peers or friends so it is easy to fall into 'temptation'. Take an example - Peer pressure. Your friends may persuade you into doing the wrong things whereas, your conscience is telling you to abide by laws and to ignore your friends. To look 'cool', we fall into the trap of peer pressure. This also applies to people. Some bad friends they mix with cause them to fall into a 'trap'.
Jason Koh (17)
Why are man greeedy?
I feel that man are greedy,not for money, but for the buying power you can get with it. If no one in the world accepted money as payment, it would effectively be useless other then for scrap paper. Most of what man do are for the self benefit. Like returning a 50 dollar note. Even if you were not tempted to keep it, you would still return it for a pleasure of fooling others and even yourself that you are "kind". If returning a 50 dollar note would cause you unbearable pain, or would cause everyone to look down on you, would you do it? I doubt it. No matter how "honest" you were, you still won't do it. And in reality, scientist have found that doing a "good/kind" act would release a rush of feel good chemicals, which probably contribute a large, if unknown part to you returning the money.
Well, that is true...
but in a whole, it just boils down to one thing and we must accept it. we humans are greedy! just plain GREEDY!
No, Man is not born greedy, for heaven's sake, no!!! Why does everyone think that way??? It is Man's nature that causes him to be greedy! The nature of moving away from pain to pleasure!
Yes, people have been talking about the $10 & $5 dollars example, but it is wrong! We do not take the $10 because of greed! We take it because we know that we will get more pleasure from the $10!(ps: stop thinking sick. Pleasure has more than 1 meaning, you very well know!!!)
You get it it?!?! Everything we do is to for pleasure, for our own amusement or fun!!! Let me give you an example: You studying freakingly hard for the upcoming exam. Think that's for pleasure? Yes!!! Ultimately, you study because you want pleasure!!! Don't understand? Can't you see? Why do you study? Because you want to get good results right??? Then why you want good results? Why not just fail? You want to get good results because when you do, you will get gratification, right? Your parents will praise you, right? Your friends will admire you, right? All pleasure, happiness! You study so that you be happy, satisfied & content in the long run! Can you see now? Studying will bring you pleasure in the end; you know that subconsciously! It's just that studying is not the immediate kind of pleasure! Its called "delayed pleasure"! Just like your homework! Homework should be done first so that you can play later!
Agree?
Now, let's move back to the $10 & $5 example. You will take the $10 rather than the $5 because you know that you will get more pleasure! What you can buy with the $5, you can buy double with the $10! That's why! You simply take the $10 because you will have more pleasure! (Of course, the smart ones would just take both notes.)
Yes, taking the $10 instead of the $5 can be called greedy. It is greed. But it is also called "moving from pain to pleasure"! Geddit? Don't agree? Let's say you have a choice to extort either $10 or $5 from your classmate.
Now, I'm sure most would prefer to take the latter, & some would prefer not to extort at all! Why? Because they know, if they extort $10 (which is much more than $5) from their classmate, the would feel guilty! They would have a weight on their conscience! They know that the extorted classmate would hate them! That's pain! Or rather, mental pain. But what if don't extort instead? Then you would feel guilt-free! You would be happier! Pleasure! You would not extort because you are moving from pain to pleasure! Get my point now?
So now that I have presented my proof that it is not just greed but the natural want of pleasure & the hate for pain, you can surely see that Man is not born greedy but just that they want pleasure rather than pain!
As the saying goes, " There is only one good, & that is knowledge. There is only one bad, & that is ignorance." Now, you surely know that being good will make you happy in the end, so that is why you decide to be good! Those greedy people who kill for money, they are ignorant to the fact of how much they are despised by the society! That is why they decide to kill for money! They do not understand! If they did just one good deed, just one, & gets thanked, they would realize that doing good feels so much better than doing evil!
So do you get it? If you do good, you feel great in the end! But usually when we have our moment of greed, we totally forget that we might feel horrible & guilty in the end! If we resist the temptation, we might end up feeling better!
& yes, how about the moments
when you find someone's 1o-cent coin & they say they give it to you? You take it, right? That is not greed! The definition for greed is "the selfish desire for or pursuit of money, wealth, power, food, or other possessions, especially when this denies the same goods to others." When the person gives you the 10-cents, you take it because you know that it will not hurt anyone! It is not selfish!
All in all, Man is not born greedy; they just want pleasure & no pain. So if a baby realizes that stealing is an easy way to get pleasure, it will do so! However, if the baby realizes that good deeds will be more pleasurable than stealing, it will also do so! Geddit?!?!
Walao, after writing all that chunks of words, I really hope you see my point. Otherwise, I'm going to screeeaam.
& ps:
Man's greed is NOT influenced by others. It is the desire for pleasure! This desire is always born in every Man!
Lie Wen, we donate organs to others because of generosity! Haven't you heard of 助人为快乐之本 before? When we help others, we will be happy! We are willing to do it! When we see how thankful the person is, we feel happy too!
Well time for another one of my meaningful comments. Now lets get some things straight. There is a government in everything. Lets take class 1A. You guys are governed by the class com. The class com is governed by Ms Shyamira. Ms Shyamiran is governed by Mr Loh who is governed by the MOE which in turn is governed by the PAP which is governed by Mr Lee Kuan Yew. So lets say that there was no government. We were al minding our own business. It is human nature to favour and listen to someone more then we listebn to others. So because of this instinct we will inevitably have a leader who will govern us. We need a government, c'mon let's get real. Every one of us well knows that without a government nothing happens. Even though you may mantion corrupt countries such as africa let's look at this from a diffrent point of view. Africa would still be in the form of tribes by the 21st century. Why? There was no government to lead them. To star modernizing, to start advancing the nation. Whether the government is corrupt or not is an entirely different matter. Things still happen. And also if a government is corrupt, the people wil sooner or later come together as one to revolt. So this will bring people together.
And so, about today's lesson. Humans, when they are born, already have greed honest and all that. It is the environment that further brings out these qualities. It is natural greed to want more. But the environment brings out this quality and makes us even more greedy. Look at mahatma gandhi he is not perfect. He definitely has a certain amount of greed. But his heart reponded to the environment in such a way that his qualities of non-violence was brought out. So it is how man's heart responds to the environment that makes us different. This is why, I am me and only me.
this is to bok won
Yes , as your example says, we want more money for more pleasure, but dosen't that show a greed for pleasure??
Thiya, by the way, Afirca does have a gorvernment, just that there has been alot of bloodshed a low progress gor the pass 20years
sry, meant and bloodshed
Yes. I feel that people need to be governed. No power and dictation will lead a country astray, making her lose track of her ultimate goal: To be a well established, well-maintained and a wealthy country, with an affluent society. If there is no government, there will be no one to take the lead. The country will collapse into ruin, with riots being an everyday occurrence , pathetic defence and weaponry, obsolete technology and insanely high crime rates island wide. If I may disagree with Jia Peng; without the pigs, would there be order in Animal Farm? Would the animals have the capability to maintain Animal Farm? No, they wouldn’t. However, he is right to say that too much power and desire for money will cause corruption in the government, (as shown in animal farm) which is inevitable, as the government consists of human beings. Human beings, I daresay, are greedy by nature. However, the true nature of Man is being influenced by the environment.
Lets take this scenario as an example:
Two men were brought up from totally different societies\ enviroments:
One was brought up inculcated with high moral values and manners, and the other was brought up “inculcated” with little or no moral values and has poor mannerisms. When both see a woman drop money on the floor, both will have a natural instinct to pocket it. However, the first man would immediately shrug off the idea, thinking that it is morally wrong to do so, however sweet the tempatation and would return it to the lady. However, the second one would follow his natural instinct and pocket the money, without sparing a second thought about the lady. Of course, we human beings sin and occasionally go against our values and priciples. But all the time? The answer is a fat NO.
That’s why, if you have heard of Samaritans who donate half their wealth to charities to crazy, psychotic serial killers who kill without blinking an eye, you’ll probably know the reason why they are what they are today.
~TRISTEN
Tristen> Lie Wen
Nice usage of DEAL OR NO DEAL as an anology to prove the greed of human beings. =)
Hello i am Tomus. To have a government is not the main question but to have a GOOD government is then the main thing. Like in Singapore, the reason why we are living so harmoniously togrther in peace is because of government. So we need a good government to influence the citizens in the correct direction. If there is no government, many things could happen for example, the people not taking the initiative to take any action for things that happen around them, people will try to do sorts of things to take over the world seeing that no one is in control, and certainly there would be a number of these people and they will just gather their friends and start a war with each other and resulting in a war. Then the people who sits and do nothing will start to ask,"Why is this happening? Why am I also involved inthe war? Why is it that everyone cannot sit down and chose peacefully?" then they start to regret and make a riot and stuff like that. See? Well, of course, that is WORST case scenario if there is no government. But the most likely scenario too. Even if a certain country is very peaceful, the human mind can switch anytime too and chaos will grow unexpectedly. Of course only one must be the main ruler, if not, when there are two governments, they might go against each other also. so its best to choose only ONE overall ruler. Probably, people will find it more relaxing without a government BUT when nobody is in charge of protecting, governing and stuff like that, things start happening and they have no one to turn to for help. Unless they are phsyco and join in the "fun" of war. Like the old saying "Better to be safe than sorry". As the government is here to do all they can to help, not to purposely restrct you. Unless the government is on the dark side then it is a different story... Oh well, the government is always right.
by Tomus Yong (40)
1A
P.S. by the way i do not know what i will be called because i am using my sister's account. So I am not 9apr90, ok?
On the point that gorvernments are related to higher technology-
The question is " Is technology actually good". yes, I know that it has does much good for our race, but what about for plants/ animals? 140,000 spieces die every year, and much of it is related to humans.Also, another point is nuclear warheads. created by man.Even the primitive models used in Japan caused at least 150,000 to die , and the radiation was suffered for many years. And those were just the primitive ones.Now, nuclear war heads carry a bigger explosive load and a better range. The decision whether or not to use it simply lies on 1 man - the president. If there was just 1corrupt person became America's president,and was bribed to fire it, Boom!!!! America has thousands of advanced war heads, so do the maths yourself.
A thing about gorvernments is that it gets people togther.This is perfectly fine, but the thing is- togther, people will dare to do things they never tried alone. Like attacking another village in the ancient time. A single person will not there to attack a village, and if he does, he will lose. Also,this is to Tristen. We are hardly as bad as you described without gorvernments.If so, mankind would not have evolved past homo erectus, and early man will have all died. The only reason why a country is chaotic with out a gorvernment because man kind, over the past centuries, have become used to gorvernments. Any way, if we are so "civilised" then why do humans kill game for sport?.Lets take it from the animals view. Some crazy guy comes and kill you for fun, and others , instead of clapping him in irons, congratulate him and cut you, burn you,and then, eat you.How civilised of that guy. Even for us students. If a mosquito bites you, You'll kill it, right?And what did it do? All it did was to satisfy its hunger.
Bok Woon to Joseph
It is not greed for pleasure, but pleasure for greed. Because you feel pleasured when you take more. Without pleasure, there is no greed, & without greed, there still can be pleasure.
Before I write out my opinions, I would like to say this first:
Now, to define human nature is a hard thing in itself simply because it is hard to define what is actual and true human nature. From the day a baby is born he is influenced by whatever that is around him. Even if you decide to leave him alone and see him develop, that in itself is influence, by leaving him alone. If you say that we should look to our conscience, then it is the same case, because our conscience is affected by how we are influenced. Get what I mean?
But that aside, I do think that humans are greedy only because of influence. Contrary to my earlier opinions voiced out in class, now I think otherwise, having thought about the paragraph I wrote out above.
It is very hard to pinpoint any particular part of a human without ever having been influenced before.
I feel that it is not a matter of whether humans are inherently greedy, because if we cannot point out what is true human nature, then this argument is already rendered useless.
Bok woon, I would like to disagree with you as, how can pleasure exist without greed? When you seek pleasure in any form, isn't that already the first step towards greed?
Take the example of power. By some unlikely chance if power comes by you, surely you wouldn't be content with what you want. Since, according to your train of thought, I would want power for pleasure, then surely the more power I have, then the more I crave? The more I crave, the more greed I have?
However, I am still neutral on the point of whether humans are greedy by nature, as simply, we should answer this question first. What is human nature?
The extent of influence is very dangerous. Propaganda works on the very principle of being able to INFLUENCE. Even the slightest influence might push you off the course you were supposed to walk.
Now, everyone would want to better themselves, to push themselves farther than their peers to be the head of the pack. That sounds like human nature, but simply put, why can it not be influence?
In fact, if you take what I have said in perspective, then influence could be the very foundation of human nature, since human nature is in itself...nothing. To say it is pure in itself is to base an assumption on just a singular school of thought eg. a particular religion.
To conclude...Humans are who they are. Each and every one of us are unique, and how we influence each other could well be building up one of the many layers that build up our own school of thought and our own morals. It is not for us to judge whether we are inherently good or bad, because if we do not understand ourselves, we cannot possibly make a conscious decision.
Personally, I feel that we do not have to discuss whether we are born "evil" or whether it is the environment. The point is that we have the ability to do both right and wrong. Yes, we will make mistakes along the way, we will all do that. The important thing is whether we are going to pick ourselves up and redeem ourselves by doing the right thing.
Daniel Kong (10)
1A
Oh yeah, in relation to the greed/pleasure thing, I think that it is becoming a "chicken and egg" argument.Here is something I picked up. Buddism(forgive me if I spell it wrongly) teaches its followers that human suffering is due to their desire of earthly things. So I think thatbboth answers(greed/pleasure)are the same as they relate to the point of humans WANTING something more.
I think that influnce , and not self is the main cause for evil, though self may affect it.Even if a evil person wanted to do a crime, but if he was surrounded by friends who he knew would scorn him if he did the crime, then he would not do it. This proves evil in self is weaker then influence.
Also, if every one arround you told you that smoking was good for your health and would help you in every sense, you would naturraly smoke.
Another thing about society is this. If everyone one is equal, and got the same pay, the same respect the same everything as everyone else, they just would't work as there would be no encouragement to work harder.That's why the animals in animal farm suffered. With snowball chased out, there was little to no oppostion, and so he could make bad orders and still follow it out. If snowball was still there, then he would instantly have used the u popular decision as a lever to throw napoleon out. As such both would constantly strive to appear to be the better one, to try to be the leader, which would cause both to fail.
Hi Joseph,
You said that "We are hardly as bad as you described without gorvernments.If so, mankind would not have evolved past homo erectus, and early man will have all died. " How did you know that there was a system of government during the times of Homo Erectus? It cannot be justified.How do we know if Homo Erectus species lived alone like hermits or as tribes? Giving the benefit of the doubt that they live in tribes, how would leadership ensured their survical? Ancient cavemen were only thought to have animal like IQ, so how could they have complex system like Communism in ancient times? However i am not ruling out this possibility.
"Any way, if we are so "civilised" then why do humans kill game for sport?.Lets take it from the animals view. Some crazy guy comes and kill you for fun, and others , instead of clapping him in irons, congratulate him and cut you, burn you,and then, eat you.How civilised of that guy. Even for us students. If a mosquito bites you, You'll kill it, right?And what did it do? All it did was to satisfy its hunger." ~I cannot define civilized last time as only men in frilly coats holding canes with the respectable look. But in their time when hunting game was a civilized sport, who are we to disagree? we are not in their era, so we do not have power to judge whether their sport was civilized or not.
You also pointed out on the mosquito. True, it only wants a meal and to continue its species, but, do you think risking malaria and death trying to satisfy a mosquito is worth it? I dont think so. Why "give" your life to a mosquito who doesnt even appreciate your "blood donation" anyway? It is not going to write you a thank you card for giving it your blood! If a hornet stings you, do you let it sting you again and again because you "disturbed its peace"? If you were poisoned, do you not eat the antidote? If you could get one more mark for your paper, would you not get?
~Tristen~
Tristen,
You said that mankind would fall into chaos without a gorvernment(Earlier post) So I contridicted the point by saying that homo erectus was perfectly fine without a gorvernment.I did not say that homo erectus had gorvernments
Secondly, men are still hunting for sport. That's one reason reason why guns are allowed in america.
Thirdly, how often does a mosquito have dengue or malaria. If even a sixth of mosquitoes over the world carried disease, we would all be dead due to the fact that we are bitten frequently.
Also, while you would probably suffer slight discomfort if a mosquito bites you, the mosquito would "enjoy" certain death if you
slapped back.Its like dying for eating food in our point of view.Also,Instead of killing a mosquito for biting you,why not just discourage it by preventing stagnent water from gathering in your home.Another point is, why do you even get close to a hornet? If it was on purpose, then you deserve it, who asked you to attack their hive/whatever youdid. If accidental, then don't wait there for it to sting you, run for your life. Any way, killing the insect would be useless as it died to sting you(if it was a bee).Inthe case of wasps who can sting you repeatedlly, What are you doing standing there letting it sting you? Attempting to kill it will distract you anyway, which will in turn cuse you to slow down(if you're running)and you would probably miss.SLowing down is definately a bad idea if more then one wasp is chasing you.
Post a Comment