That's an Excellent question Nermin; and one that I believe is on many people's minds.
Trouble is it seems; that many of those same folk have different interptretations of what that means. ( For instance here in the US we have a Constitutional debate on various subjects between the interpretation of individual freedom verses common welfare. A little simplistic perhaps for such a large application but we will go with that for now. ) (
Also I think materialism plays a role in the value system here but that may be best left for another discussion. )
This I think points to a conflict of cross-purposes of
ideas taking place with
alot of people talking and
not as much thoughtful listening addressing the various concerns. Also many of these problems are
complex without simple solutions.
Real compromise; ( which obviously is what is required in most of these circumstances ); is going to
require a
Greater Good approach which means
giving something up. It is very very apparent that there are certain groups not willing to put that consideration above the self-interests; (
read dogma and ideaology, much less agenda and specific topic ); that they represent. ( I would also suggest this may be very difficult figuring in the importance
the Role the right of individual expression; or individualism if you prefer; plays in determining This common or greater good ). (
To me a Huge conundrum to consider.)
Also you must factor in
the power of the culturally informed point-of-view aspect which may differ a great deal across the range of subject matter being considered; ( read religious, buisness, secular, etc. ). And to add to the complexity the
volatile polarity energizing the anxiety now in place.
And last but not least; the
Engineering of perception for support to a constituancy; many of whom are not as informed as would be preferred;
instead of working together to find the compromised solutions required to fix the problems. ( I think the election cycle here in the US is about to see an tital wave of
superpac influence in the arena this election. ) (
And yes we are absolutely aware of the lobbyists and corporate corrupted influence and religious bias at work poisoning the system. ) (
Sorry everyone; but I couldn't resist a small personal biased rant here. )
Now as far as I know history shows these mixtures and combinations of various crisis that the human condition constantly faces has both
constantly changing yet ever the same aspects over a kind of
timeless ground that Joe talks about. ( I would offer the classic "
I Ching " text in reference to Daoism as an excellent example. ) But considering everything mentioned and the
immediacy of the moment it might be unrealistic to expect adjustments out of the
comfort zone of most politicians involved.
Metaphorically speaking one of the more profound things I ever heard referring to an
abstractional view of this sort of overwhelming calamity like a war or addressing
any major crisis was: "
War has a way of distinguishing the things that matter ". Now I absolutely do not mean to imply a war or any other ridiculous notion as a way to resolving any of this chaotic mess or that addressing it is out of reach or is unsolvable. And I certainly have
no manifesto or magic solution to suggest here.
But I would offer here the notion that human beings are not cattle and
the concern for their welfare as opposed to corporate or buisness concerns might be a more intelligent approach; although I'm sure more nebulous and difficult to achieve in the global marketplace of human affairs. In conclusion without babbling on and on;
I just think people need to step back and to try to attempt some sort of humane understanding here and that this might be a more useful avenue of pursuit at this moment like the common sense sort of approach Nermin in her post and others throughout this website in different posts have suggested. Although I realize that may be an absurd fantasy of my own delusional imagination. ( At least that's my take on it or point of view. )
Very thoughtful Nermin!