On voices that are never heard - or creating a conception of the world...

Vibeke Olsson.

Anja on the blog “Do nothing day” writes that people trying to do something about inconveniences in the society are portrayed as bad people in media.

Think about labor union blockades; think demonstrating young people, think house occupants, think animal rights activists. Are you feeling “civil disobedience– brave!” or do you feel “criminality”? And who have in that case fed you with those associations?

She also wonders if all peoples' voices are heard, the poor peoples’ for instance…

And concludes yes, there are so many voices that are never heard.

My addition: some are silenced too. Whose? How come?

And whose voices are head? Who are screaming loudest? And who don't have to scream at all? Because they are listened to and respected anyway? In some cases deservedly of course.

Are we going to need more and more gated communities here and there in the world?

Miller is right: you CAN demonstrate without using violence or without destroying material things either.

Being stuck in poverty - about being fooled (??)…

See the posting “Extremism, lobbyism, tea parties an so called ‘spontaneous uprising’, and even more about the American Dream’…” in Swedish with links (in English).

From the article "The American dream is Swedish”:

“Poverty is holding people back for generations. In Sweden too. At the same time it seems as the prerequisites for a person to break with her/his background seem to be better in our country than in other countries in other words! ‘The American Dream’ is rarest (or maybe just a dream) in its own home country.

The social mobility is worst in USA closely followed by Great Britain, Italy and France. High taxes and redistributing transferrings [as in the Scandinavian countries for instance] don’t seem to check the mobility in the society. On the contrary. Countries with more basic security societal systems [as in US, Great Britain, Italy an France?] show a lower mobility and Lind’s report point to that small income differences [instead of big] favor the social mobility[instead of the opposite].

Liberals use to say that if all have the same opportunities in theory, the society is just or equitable. Richard Tawney has called this a ‘tadpole philosophy’. Most tadpoles never become more than tadpoles. In any case they can comfort themselves with the thought that some of them will become frogs and get up on land as successful citizens with private fortunes and memberships in the tax payers association [something we don’t belong to all of us!!??].

But the theory that inequalities are disciplining people to work themselves up on land despite their start as tadpoles doesn’t seem to be true to the reality. And the difference between theory and reality (praxis) is as we know that in reality it is a disparity between theory and reality. Limited welfare, low taxes and strong economical incitements don’t contribute to movement upwards concerning income distribution. People in societies with that sort of politics get stuck.”