Why doesn't a human be united as a global citizen?
Re: Why doesn't a human be united as a global citizen?
It is possible to have immeasurable and unbounded regard for all humans, and indeed all sentient beings. But in terms of the practicalities of everyday life, and who people want to associate with and identify as being significant, one needs boundaries based on common culture and history.
Re: Why doesn't a human be united as a global citizen?
I live in a very multicultural province in Canada. I’m Caucasian. My best friend is half German/ half Chinese. I work with Persian people; East Indian men and women; I have an African co-worker; as well as other Caucasian people.
The one thing that seems to cause a divide among people is language. People who have grown up in Canada - regardless of ethnicity - are all “Canadian”. There’s a thread to our nationality which transcends race or colour. People who have lives here for five or six years and have picked up the language - you can tell that they’re “new” to Canada - but are (at the same time) - in the process of adopting Canadian values.
What I’ve learned about multiculturalism is that there’s more of a difference between individuals of any given race or ethnicity than, alternatively, there is between distinct races or ethnicities.
Everyone is different in their own way. It has nothing to do with ethnicity. But. And here’s the “but”. When a person has not adopted the language of the country all communication (along with nuances) is effectively stopped. A person does not need to be fluent in English to start to adopt Canadian values. However, if they are unable to speak the English language (in particular) I think it’s very hard for them to find good job opportunities - and that is why, in my province, various ethnic groups who haven’t really adopted the English language find it easier to go into types of work which (stereotypically) have been monopolized by certain ethic groups.
So, yeah. I believe language is a huge barrier towards people becoming global citizens. If you can’t speak the same language it’s hard to exchange values and it’s easier to find comfort within a cohort of your own ethnic group where you are already comfortable with the language.
Having interacted with a diverse range of ethnic groups I find none of the above categories to really be a nail in any coffin for people getting along and forming friendships. The people I don’t form deeper relationships with are people I can’t effectively communicate with (not that I don’t offer people like that the respect that every human deserves).
The one thing that seems to cause a divide among people is language. People who have grown up in Canada - regardless of ethnicity - are all “Canadian”. There’s a thread to our nationality which transcends race or colour. People who have lives here for five or six years and have picked up the language - you can tell that they’re “new” to Canada - but are (at the same time) - in the process of adopting Canadian values.
What I’ve learned about multiculturalism is that there’s more of a difference between individuals of any given race or ethnicity than, alternatively, there is between distinct races or ethnicities.
Everyone is different in their own way. It has nothing to do with ethnicity. But. And here’s the “but”. When a person has not adopted the language of the country all communication (along with nuances) is effectively stopped. A person does not need to be fluent in English to start to adopt Canadian values. However, if they are unable to speak the English language (in particular) I think it’s very hard for them to find good job opportunities - and that is why, in my province, various ethnic groups who haven’t really adopted the English language find it easier to go into types of work which (stereotypically) have been monopolized by certain ethic groups.
So, yeah. I believe language is a huge barrier towards people becoming global citizens. If you can’t speak the same language it’s hard to exchange values and it’s easier to find comfort within a cohort of your own ethnic group where you are already comfortable with the language.
Having interacted with a diverse range of ethnic groups I find none of the above categories to really be a nail in any coffin for people getting along and forming friendships. The people I don’t form deeper relationships with are people I can’t effectively communicate with (not that I don’t offer people like that the respect that every human deserves).
Like the three marks of conditioned existence, this world in itself is filthy, hostile, and crowded
Re: Why doesn't a human be united as a global citizen?
Do monks hide in monasteries & forests to escape the world of puthujjana?Sam Vara wrote: ↑Mon May 04, 2020 5:28 am It is possible to have immeasurable and unbounded regard for all humans, and indeed all sentient beings. But in terms of the practicalities of everyday life, and who people want to associate with and identify as being significant, one needs boundaries based on common culture and history.
There is always an official executioner. If you try to take his place, It is like trying to be a master carpenter and cutting wood. If you try to cut wood like a master carpenter, you will only hurt your hand.
https://soundcloud.com/doodoot/paticcasamuppada
https://soundcloud.com/doodoot/anapanasati
https://soundcloud.com/doodoot/paticcasamuppada
https://soundcloud.com/doodoot/anapanasati
Re: Why doesn't a human be united as a global citizen?
Of the choices: 'ignorance'.
In the sense of not knowing (in the sense of intimate, close, direct personal knowledge (not book learning education)) ones own flow of kamma-fruit
Self-cherishing and not being able to practice metta.
In the sense of not knowing (in the sense of intimate, close, direct personal knowledge (not book learning education)) ones own flow of kamma-fruit
Self-cherishing and not being able to practice metta.
Re: Why doesn't a human be united as a global citizen?
One reason is that uniting may hinder matters. If a large united group has the wrong approach to tackling a problem such as a pandemic, the problem gets worse. Better to have a range of approaches with less bureaucracy and more freedom of opinion.
Re: Why doesn't a human be united as a global citizen?
Why doesn't a human be united as a global citizen?
Because the idea is stupid. Ultimately all politics are better handled locally. Even federal governments are too extended. Its time for the states in the United States to all become their own nations, and for the EU to be destroyed. And different Chinese provinces need to become their own nations and break free of the tyranny of the CCP. (My position is lacking in your poll.)
Because the idea is stupid. Ultimately all politics are better handled locally. Even federal governments are too extended. Its time for the states in the United States to all become their own nations, and for the EU to be destroyed. And different Chinese provinces need to become their own nations and break free of the tyranny of the CCP. (My position is lacking in your poll.)
Last edited by beanyan on Mon May 04, 2020 5:43 am, edited 1 time in total.
Re: Why doesn't a human be united as a global citizen?
I'm not sure. Monasteries, and monasticism in general, seem to thrive on the boundedness of their traditions.DooDoot wrote: ↑Mon May 04, 2020 5:36 amDo monks hide in monasteries & forests to escape the world of puthujjana?Sam Vara wrote: ↑Mon May 04, 2020 5:28 am It is possible to have immeasurable and unbounded regard for all humans, and indeed all sentient beings. But in terms of the practicalities of everyday life, and who people want to associate with and identify as being significant, one needs boundaries based on common culture and history.
Re: Why doesn't a human be united as a global citizen?
That's a good point: when will Buddhism merge with Jainism by accepting the soul? And then that Jain-Buddhism merge with Hinduism by accepting God? Not gonna? Not very good world citizens then. Lead by example and dismantle your own borders first, or drop the fruitopian nonsense of "world citizens" and admit its a stupid idea.Sam Vara wrote: ↑Mon May 04, 2020 5:43 amI'm not sure. Monasteries, and monasticism in general, seem to thrive on the boundedness of their traditions.DooDoot wrote: ↑Mon May 04, 2020 5:36 amDo monks hide in monasteries & forests to escape the world of puthujjana?Sam Vara wrote: ↑Mon May 04, 2020 5:28 am It is possible to have immeasurable and unbounded regard for all humans, and indeed all sentient beings. But in terms of the practicalities of everyday life, and who people want to associate with and identify as being significant, one needs boundaries based on common culture and history.
Re: Why doesn't a human be united as a global citizen?
Then why people fight and kill each other for freedom of opinion?
What about the one party has more firepower?
Buddha said we quarrel with each other for our views.
“As the lamp consumes oil, the path realises Nibbana”
Re: Why doesn't a human be united as a global citizen?
If the Tibetans still want to have their own nation instead of be part of China, now is their time to act, since the world is mad at China for the Wuflu and might back breaking it into different nations. The virus may still unite everyone, against China existing as such a large nation, and it may unite to carve it out into many.
Re: Why doesn't a human be united as a global citizen?
This looks as if we are about to be advised to move to DWE, but here goes!SarathW wrote: ↑Mon May 04, 2020 5:50 amThen why people fight and kill each other for freedom of opinion?
What about the one party has more firepower?
Buddha said we quarrel with each other for our views.
1) People tend to fight over freedom of opinion only when it is denied. That's why groups and countries that allow free opinions thrive and are peaceful.
2) If one party has more firepower, then it maintains its freedom. Firepower in itself does not cause conflict.
3) Quarrelling is bad, but discussion of and conflict over views is how we make progress. Questioning views is how science progresses.
Re: Why doesn't a human be united as a global citizen?
Its sometimes called 'monotheism'.
Isaiah 14:26
This is the plan determined for the whole world; this is the hand stretched out over all nations.
For the Lord Almighty has purposed, and who can thwart him? His hand is stretched out, and who can turn it back?
Isaiah 66:20
And they will bring all your people, from all the nations, to my holy mountain in Jerusalem as an offering to the Lord—on horses, in chariots and wagons, and on mules and camels,” says the Lord.
Matthew 28:19
Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit,
Islam contains teachings that clearly argue against the most important elements of nationalism.
https://renovatio.zaytuna.edu/article/w ... sm-collide
There is always an official executioner. If you try to take his place, It is like trying to be a master carpenter and cutting wood. If you try to cut wood like a master carpenter, you will only hurt your hand.
https://soundcloud.com/doodoot/paticcasamuppada
https://soundcloud.com/doodoot/anapanasati
https://soundcloud.com/doodoot/paticcasamuppada
https://soundcloud.com/doodoot/anapanasati
Re: Why doesn't a human be united as a global citizen?
I would add to this that right now there is talk of forced vaccinations since certain high up know-it-alls (Fauci, Bill Gates) have the opinion that this is a good idea, although the general public does not. And SarathW might not see any problem with that and be first in line to get the forced vaccination. But what if it was forced cyberization? There is this idea of precedent. If they can force me to get a vaccine injected in my body against my will, why can't they force me to give up my body and have my conaciousness uploaded into a robot body? Anyone ever watch Ghost in the Shell: Stand Alone Complex? Sci-fi has already predicted it, just as movies about pandemics and totalitarian governments arising via force vaccines predicted this one. If you won't stand against tyranny now because you agree with it, what about then when its forced cyberization? Now being written in Japan, the Ghost in the Shell series predicts that at least Buddhists will resist cyberization for religious reasons. Would SarathW's "citizen of the world" idea support them, or crush them? This is why we need different nations eith different policies. If the same dumb policy is enacted world wide it could wipe out humanity, but maybe not by killing them all, maybe by turning them into something less than human.Sam Vara wrote: ↑Mon May 04, 2020 6:00 amThis looks as if we are about to be advised to move to DWE, but here goes!
1) People tend to fight over freedom of opinion only when it is denied. That's why groups and countries that allow free opinions thrive and are peaceful.
2) If one party has more firepower, then it maintains its freedom. Firepower in itself does not cause conflict.
3) Quarrelling is bad, but discussion of and conflict over views is how we make progress. Questioning views is how science progresses.
Re: Why doesn't a human be united as a global citizen?
The Sikh religion is also monotheistic. Even the most devout Sikh Canadians are respectful of all cultures (and for E.g. aren’t in the habit of trying to convert people).
Canada is a good example of the fact THAT multiculturalism WORKS - as well as examples of how and why it can go wrong and lead to segmented communities (or communities with cultural boundaries). Religion is one of those factors that leads to segmentation.
It’s important to keep in mind that Canada is a young country with a lot of opportunity for education and gainful employment. We have our share of corruption and organized crime. However our resources are bountiful.
Canada is a good example of the fact THAT multiculturalism WORKS - as well as examples of how and why it can go wrong and lead to segmented communities (or communities with cultural boundaries). Religion is one of those factors that leads to segmentation.
It’s important to keep in mind that Canada is a young country with a lot of opportunity for education and gainful employment. We have our share of corruption and organized crime. However our resources are bountiful.
Like the three marks of conditioned existence, this world in itself is filthy, hostile, and crowded