@LibreSolutionsNetwork
On quick look, if he means 'good for the planet' as in 'we have a chance to wake up' (and if that chance is really really real) then maybe... because I feel like as bad as war is we (the many or leaders) also let it get to that stage and don't want to put ourselves in harms way... so other people end up doing it elsewhere (hard to see but long invisible chain + we pay money for it and other types of cost on top)... so I don't want to accept this as the way... but I feel (without disdain) that logically the *only* that will motivate us us is for us to be hut off from energy or 'supplies' (also a military term) and really wake up and almost start from scratch...
So there is a big if here and proven track record we have. Hats of to Dutch and European farmers but really everyone kinda needs to stop everything at some point and do it from scratch (or both at the same time but they will never be motivated or have time or see the ponzi scheme's that come back to haunt us many fights at a time...)
Oh the 2nd paragraph I almost ignored this is mostly:
war = wake the fuck up for people
or
war = no more coffee for you (coffee another big example / south america)... those 'simple things' all come back to haunt us and basically we have to take the hit in many ways, no avoiding it or displacing is worthy sometimes.
@freeschool
When deciding that the world needs radical, painful change (and if you're right) the proper pathway isn't to add a war between nuclear powers on top of it.
I'll add the obligatory reminder that those initiating the war will never make the "sacrifices" you're calling for here, and would happily grind the rest of humanity into dust for a high. Supporting them is not only suicide, but treacherous to your fellow human beings.
And the political forces demanding more people live this way, do NOTHING to make these kinds of changes themselves, and on a local level, actually go out of their way to make policy which makes it very hard, if not impossible to achieve. The only thing they are doing is passing bills which give them more money and power.
Link
@atyh
There are many ways such a change could be forced without the added unnecessary bloodshed.
For example the world switching away from fake debt-based money to a sound money system would create an abrubt halt to many of the same things without the additional needless violence. I'm not first in line to advocate a sudden transition in this case even if I ultimately support it because the transition itself would be massively painful to the people you're ideally trying to help.
@gabriel @atyh
Somehow if we are to curve their logic (if just for this post going again it doesn't work or even makes it worse / trains them using u$ as focus) then I would say it needs something theoretically similar to their style (yes I'm very accommodating here if it can reduce addictions to power or ultimatums down the line)... and then reduce it to less denominations...
Right now what you're say, much as I agree or any sudden or opposing I think is either done or creates more attention to the wounds for them to exploit... so if we are down the money avenue I think we need a way to chip down what they piled up...
*Almost not* totally the virtue signal way as it's not logical inside what is too deep (which for this post I think nearer 80-100% we are or lean towards so something equally measurable as a matrix in the other direction / downwards in number/speed like stopping a train which can't be stopped dead (else people die, hence some ways too). Ideally while exchanging good people friendly exchanges between us (but hardly anyone sees this as 'scientific' or worthy of their time... so that's almost exactly what the get (less relativity / more isolation).
Also people don't trust or believe in another way to even try random or trust / believe others.
That also sticks them firmly in stagnation.
