Kasz216 said:
blkfish92 said:
Kasz216 said:
blkfish92 said:
Kasz216 said:
blkfish92 said:
Kasz216 said:
So in otherwords, if you go into a hospital feeling ill, you would be fine with them giving you random medications with random effects most of which would probably be negative just because they were "doing something."
|
Wow are you kidding? That's plain stupid and not what I meant, I mean it's better to do something rather than sit back and letting things unroll randomly, of course that doesn't affect things like what you said which is different.
|
Sure it does, as stated above the current protests are focused on doing something that won't help, and in reality will be harmful to the goals that they actually want to try and fix.
It's easier to build on an empty lot then one full of useless and harmful regulations.
Or to put it another way....
better to do nothing to get out of a ditch then digging downwards.
|
What? You have to do something to progress with anything, like rebellions back in the day, such as civil war or simple America vs Britain back in the 1700s, point being something has to be done and what those people are doiung is a step no matter how you look at it.
|
It is a step...
a step backwords.
The revolutionary was is actually an ironic comparison.
When taught about the revolutionary war, the very first thing US school children are taught about is the Boston Massacre.
Do you know who signed on to be the British soldiers lawyer? John Adams.
Why? He recognized that finding the troops guilty was a mistake and a negative.
|
Ya and that massacre led to great things, everything worked for the better.
|
Only because adams succeeded in stopping the idocy. Had those who started the boston massacre got their way the revolution would of never happened.
|
Your absoluely right, but thing is something was done that had started the revolution, meaning they didn't just sit back and do nothing. Protesting, though without a leader and some what unorganized can still lead to greater things.
