...just aren't the way they seem. I think it's time the youth started speaking their mind. After all, we are the future generation. Let the future generation have more say in what sort of a country we want to inherit.
We don't want a country plagued by infighting. We don't want a country ruled and divided along religious lines. We might want some measure of equality. But we sure as hell don't need the nonsense passed down from you guys in power right now.
6 comments:
aren't we supposed to pass down knowledge and experience? who is to say what are to be passed down and what are not. well, the youth are the inexperienced. relatively.
Are you suggesting that you no longer qualify to be considered as "youths"? In that case please write to the major political parties and ask them to remove their youth chiefs - they are all too old to lead a youth wing.
We can pass down knowledge and experience, but does it mean that there can't be radical changes in thinking, ie. paradigm shifts?
And we may be inexperienced, but does that mean we can't make conscious judgments of our own? If we keep relying on the present elders to think for us.. then we fail.
Our elders faced a world at war, colonialism and sweet potatoes. We face a world warmed, extremism and recessions. Who's to say we can't handle our share? No one can say that as time goes on the generations are downgrading, lest you use the same standards for each.
Cannons were once as feared as the A-bomb. Unity isn't as easy as conquering others and subduing them with military force a la the Pax Romana. Y2K was thought to be the end of computers and the world (to be repeated in 2013).
Sure, we don't have a revision of the Philosophiæ Naturalis Principia Mathematica with each generation but that doesn't mean the successors are any dumber than their predecessors.
Besides, if one analyses Kyp's stance on our respected and beloved politicians, it seems to be that Jun Yeu's final sentence may be the other way around...
oops. i meant "we" as in the society. not me and you as "we".
the older generation have always been a "guide" for the youth because they have experience. what makes the judgments of the youth more credible? youth will make change. but is it for the better?
as corrupt you think the current government maybe, i believe there will be a lot more chaos without it.
Then I have to agree with your points - elders pass down the do's and dont's, i.e. actual experience via trial and error.
The changes by the youth in turn, are what their successors look to as the aforesaid guide of what we do and don't. Ultimately all change is for the better, but only if there's another successor that gets the hint.
Of course, that doesn't mean the juniors didn't catch something we didn't. A new discovery, light shone on an old fault - time and time again age-old adages are proven false, like catching colds from being cold. In this way our juniors are just as capable as we are.
Relating to point 2, just because I'm better off with something than without doesn't mean I cannot complain about it. I'm not being ungrateful, cynic or wasteful; rather I pave the way for progress.
Before anyone accuses me of being airheaded as well, put it this way. If we were to be satisfied with what we are now because life for us is so much better than for some people, there's no need for us to work so hard to improve, is there? No need for us to migrate to greener pastures for future generations, because hey, my life's better than someone else's so I should be satisfied to remain in a status quo.
As much as I appreciate what the government has done for us (most of all my citizenship - I truly appreciate this), one cannot sweep its less favourable side under the carpet. If there needs to be something improved we point it out, and hopefully the ones in-charge pick it out and fix it.
Upon rereading your comment in light of the proper context, I agree with the point that society passes down knowledge and experience.
====================
Now for your second post. On the surface, things appear correct - the older generation guides the younger generation, shaping the younger generation's choices and actions.
But that is all they can do: to guide and suggest how we should do things, preferably with some evidence to back up reasons for doing so. In the end, we will be the ones choosing how to act - either we act based on our elders' guidance and evidence, or we can choose not do [provided that in doing so we make informed decisions].
In terms of causing change, there is always the paradigm shift to consider. The older generation may not be able to achieve this shift in thinking, but the youth can. And the older generation may have the experience to back up their ways of thinking, but the youth have experienced the effect of those ways of thinking [especially when it comes to politics].
Also, the youth have the benefit of having fresher brains to deal with thinking through complex issues and dissecting them. As for change, that one is difficult to crack, akin to a chaotic weather system. Shift the initial conditions a bit, and you can have a totally different outcome. Human systems would be similar in terms of chaotic complexity, thus we will run into some obstacles in predicting the outcome of a simple change.
====================
Now for the government. It is corrupt - numerous cases are reported in the mainstream media. I will admit that there are more clean politicians than corrupt politicians. But what happens when the corrupt ones are the ones higher up the ladder of government? Does it mean that we shouldn't get rid of them just because the rest are clean and doing their jobs very well?
You raise a point about more chaos without the current government. Do you refer to a situation of anarchy, or do you refer to the situation whereby the ruling coalition is removed, and the opposition coalition forms the new government? That needs to be cleared up before I can proceed to discuss further.
Post a Comment