PDA

View Full Version : Would you choose Peace or Money ?



Maciamo
Dec 14, 2004, 11:22
If you were given the choice between a huge sum of money or peace in th world (don't ask me how, or it would already be done), which one would you choose ?

I'd certainly go for peace in the world, whatever the sum offered.

My prime concerns in life are far from being topped by money as I mentioned in another thread (http://www.wa-pedia.com/forum/showpost.php?p=152165&postcount=4).

My ideal world is one of peace, happiness and reason. Money is just a necessity created by some futile cravings for material possessions. Only food, a home to sleep and feel secure, and access to information (eg. the Internet) are absolutely necessary for the good development of a human being. All the rest is optional and should not be a cause of unhappiness. At best, the external factors that influence happiness are the weather (sunny and comfortable enough) and the relations to people ("the society") around us.

I am sometimes appaled at the shallowness of people. In Japan, for instance (as it is where I live, the example springs to mind more quickly), many people I know seem preoccupied by giving each other presents (o-miyage, o-chugen, o-toshidama...), helping a old woman carrying her heavy bag, being polite, arriving on time, etc. These are all relatively important things, but what shocks me is that these very people would certainly choose money over world peace, because money and material possessions is all that ultimately counts for them. I can't agree with that because I can control my cravings, relativize them and make them feel unimportant. My Japanese just do not understand that buying lots of stuff won't make you more happy in the long-term. It may cause some excitement and satisfaction at first, but then the novelty wears off and another craving replaces it.

Isn't weird that in a country supposedly influenced by Buddhist values, the most basic principle of Buddhism (renunciation of desires for material possessions) should be so startingly absent from people's minds ? But we could say that in the most Christian countries (USA, Southern Italy 50 years ago), the most basic principles of Christianity ("love and forgive all") should be as blatantly at odds with the behaviour of people. The US is after all the developed country with the highest crime (and esp. murder) rate and the country of the vendetta par excellence, where people sue other people over anything. That is a far cry from Christian forgiveness. I'd say that Japanese people are much more "Christian" (i.e. following the teachng of the Christ) in their behaviour than most Westerners, but particularily compared to Americans.

This kind of "Christian" behaviour does not distrub me at all (as an Atheist). What bothers me is "the only true and almight God" and "fear the divine punishment" thing and all cult (mass, prayer, crucifix...) and superstitions (saints, Xmas...). Jesus was otherwise a good chap, but not very realistic in his expectations, as 2000 years of Christianity (in name at least) have proven.

TwistedMac
Dec 14, 2004, 12:34
1 billion!
peace is overrated and a generation of it would only breed worse wars next generation, a generation revolting against the last only in epic dimensions...

ok so I'm just really selfish and I justify it with that.

RockLee
Dec 14, 2004, 21:01
peace ofcourse...no doubt

jovial_jon
Dec 14, 2004, 23:07
Peace.

Money is not particularly important to me and having more than enough to get by leaves me feeling pretty empty in a way as it is. The knowledge that others were living peaceful lives is certainly worth more to me.

If you balance up $1million for yourself vs peace for 6 billion people (many of whom could really do with peace in their lives), I think it's a pretty easy choice.

kirei_na_me
Dec 14, 2004, 23:12
Peace.

If we had peace, it would give those people in turmoil a chance to make something of themselves, and then maybe everyone could prosper as a result.

Forget the money. I'd be much happier knowing that my children and all other children in the world would be safer.

EscaFlowne
Dec 15, 2004, 00:03
1 billion!
peace is overrated and a generation of it would only breed worse wars next generation, a generation revolting against the last only in epic dimensions...

ok so I'm just really selfish and I justify it with that.


Ditto :relief: And besides the thought of peace is like a fleeting dream.

Mimmy_08
Dec 15, 2004, 00:05
Definetely PEACE

Fantt
Dec 15, 2004, 02:30
Peace. Though, I don't think I'd really want to have to choose anything that would artificially alter the future. The future is as it will be and I'd rather leave it at that.

Jungle Boy
Dec 15, 2004, 11:45
I would choose the billion dollars. Simply because you stated in your hypothetical "World peace for at least a generation". After that generation no doubt that mankind would descent into the same pattern of voilence that it has followed for thousands of years. There will never be world peace, call my synical but it's man's nature to kill and that will sadly never change.

Fantt
Dec 15, 2004, 12:14
The world is a much happier place when your thinking is more optimistic. At least for me it is. I can imagine a world with no wars or killing. There's so many more constructive things we can do as a species. Once aging, senility, heart disease and cancer have been cured, people will think differently about death and killing.

TwistedMac
Dec 15, 2004, 12:42
yesssss.. it will be done much more efficiently and in much larger quantities thanks to development and science!

ax
Dec 15, 2004, 13:06
Has there been peace in this world? even the goose that queitly float on the lake, its feet is not at peace :)

ax

ragedaddy
Dec 15, 2004, 13:33
I would choose the billion dollars. Simply because you stated in your hypothetical "World peace for at least a generation". After that generation no doubt that mankind would descent into the same pattern of voilence that it has followed for thousands of years. There will never be world peace, call my synical but it's man's nature to kill and that will sadly never change.

My sentiments exactly, In a Utopian world there may be a chance for world peace, but the fact is that this is reality, and it is never going to happen. You can have all the optimism in the world, but as long as there is money, natural resources, and power in this world, peace goes right out the window.

jovial_jon
Dec 15, 2004, 14:45
I still think depriving the rest of the world of peace for their lifetime so you can have some money is pretty lame, regardless of whether the peace will last. If somehow we could guarantee peace for a generation, then who knows what could happen after that? It's impossible to predict how the future would turn out due to the arrival of peace because it's never happened. Humans are weird creatures and it's impossible to say 'this is how we will react' to something which would be such a major change to what we're used to.

Elizabeth
Dec 15, 2004, 21:56
The world is a much happier place when your thinking is more optimistic. At least for me it is. I can imagine a world with no wars or killing. There's so many more constructive things we can do as a species. Once aging, senility, heart disease and cancer have been cured, people will think differently about death and killing.
I definately don't think aging is a disease, much less one that will be 'cured' anytime soon, perhaps heart disease, Alzheimers and cancer in the next generation or two. But then what will there be left to accomplish ?

It reminds me of a book which came out a few years ago called "War is the Force which gives Life Meaning" by a former NYTimes war correspondent who was ultimately irrefutably repulsed by the horrors of political violence at least and argues it is only perpetuated by certain types of people addicted to killing like addicts to drugs. On the other hand, there is space for reflection and thought in the title. So I'd have to say peace, but only for a generation at a time.

Fantt
Dec 15, 2004, 23:01
Some very smart scientists think that aging is a curable disease (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/4003063.stm).

One hundred years ago people would have laughed at the thought of sending people to the moon or travelling from Europe the the states in a matter of hours. Curing aging may be controversial, but again, I'd rather be optimistic. People a lot more intelligent than me are working very hard to make it a reality.

Elizabeth
Dec 15, 2004, 23:11
Some very smart scientists think that aging is a curable disease (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/4003063.stm).

One hundred years ago people would have laughed at the thought of sending people to the moon or travelling from Europe the the states in a matter of hours. Curing aging may be controversial, but again, I'd rather be optimistic. People a lot more intelligent than me are working very hard to make it a reality.
But what would be the point ? :? There are other perspectives on life besides the challenge of scientific pursuit, obviously.

Fantt
Dec 15, 2004, 23:39
The point would be to eliminate the suffering caused by growing old.

Elizabeth
Dec 15, 2004, 23:43
The point would be to eliminate the suffering caused by growing old.
At what age should aging be eliminated, though ? And why is it not sufficient to simply work on the diseases concomitant with old age which directly effect the degree of suffering ? The answer must lie in those links I haven't made time for yet.... :p

Flashjeff
Dec 19, 2004, 20:12
Well, as long as human beings populate this planet, we'll never have world peace. That's just too unrealistic, so I'll take the money and run!
:cool:

sgt. Pepper
Dec 21, 2004, 04:28
I'd take the money.

MeyA
Dec 21, 2004, 04:31
WORLD PEACE.

The money sounds tempting but NOT worth peace.

TwistedMac
Dec 21, 2004, 08:00
notice how the swedes (neutral country, no wars for a couple hundred years now) chose the money :p

are we spoiled with peace or fed up with it?

sgt. Pepper
Dec 22, 2004, 05:17
Both i guess. :)

Lacan
Dec 22, 2004, 08:58
over money, so all human beings should give me a thanksfull dollar, :D

babar-san
Dec 23, 2004, 07:50
have to go with peace. im sorta empathic, and i cant stand to see ppl or animals for that matter suffer for reasons they cannot control.

Japanimaniac
Jan 8, 2005, 14:24
I went for $1 billion. The only way to have "world peace" would be to make everyone mindless zombies (I often make reference to The Time Machine when I'm debating with somebody). $1 billion would be more than enough to bring peace and happiness to those that matter to me.

Uncle Frank
Jan 8, 2005, 22:14
would be needed for peace to ever come about. I think the only possible hope would be an invader from space we could all hate and kill togeather.
Think of all the poor people in the weapons trade who would be out of work and suffering without our daily dose of hate & death.

Frank

:blush:

Shooter452
Jan 9, 2005, 01:37
Peace (I assume here we are discussing some utopian concept of "world peace" here) or money? I dunno....it would kinda depend on "what kind of peace" and "how much money" wouldn't it?

The Soviet gulag's insured guests would get a certain amount of peace...but it wasn't any fun to be there. When we are all bending under the same whip, we would certainly be peaceful folks, wouldn't we? Peace I want, but always ask at what price. I can tell you that there has not been a lot of peace in my lifetime. Even in those times when I thought we had peace, there was not peace everywhere. And there is no peace like the peace of the DEAD, but I dunno if I wanna go there before my time to find out how good it is.

Soooooooo....we come to "money."

Since we are "blue skying" this, let's say it would hafta be a LOT of cash. More than I could possibly load into my Bronco, I will tell thee that! We are talking about a big, big, number here, ladies and gentlemen. A big, big, big number. If I had it, y'all would each get a new car just for shaking my hand. It may be a Yugo, but it would be a NEW Yugo.

Wow! I guess that makes me a materialistic, reactionary, parasite! Don't worry, though. It ain't ever gonna happen.

Well, I used to want to save the whales. Does that get me any points? Not in Japan, I'll bet. Oh, well! *big grin* Whatchagonnado?

Flashjeff
Jan 9, 2005, 17:21
would be needed for peace to ever come about. I think the only possible hope would be an invader from space we could all hate and kill together.

Hmm! Wasn't that basically the plot of "Independence Day"?


Think of all the poor people in the weapons trade who would be out of work and suffering without our daily dose of hate & death.

Indeed! We can't afford to have more people out of work if we didn't have weapons and stuff to build!

:D

necrozombie
Jan 15, 2005, 03:00
i feel kinda bad to admit it..

but i'd take the money. :x 1 billion is fine with me. i also agree that peace is definately overrated.

mizerable_d
Jan 18, 2005, 07:09
1 billion bucks is nice for me

jieshi
Jan 18, 2005, 08:07
well look at it realistically, peace on earth (as in no fighting what so ever) is never going to happen no matter what you do. Someone is always going to get pissed off about something and threaten to blow someone up.

So I would take the money (hehe) use a massive chunk of it to try and better conditions in the world and then use a little bit to look after me and the ones i love

jovial_jon
Jan 18, 2005, 21:18
Maybe I'm misunderstanding this whole thing, but one of the options is peace, yet people are saying 'peace could never happen'. But isn't that the point of the question; saying that we can have peace, regardless of how likely it is? Oh well, whatever. :p

Lina Inverse
Jan 19, 2005, 04:40
Just give me enough money - with enough money, you can buy peace, at least for a big part of the world.
True 100% world peace will probably never happen, that's quite unrealistic - I'll agree with jieshi there.

Knives
Jan 19, 2005, 05:03
man i would take 1billion$$ its in human nature to fight and have war we have been doing it sence the dawn of man and sure peace would be nice but the world would not work right, we kill animals for food we kill each other because we cant get along so im just looking at it the truth world peace will most likey never happen