It’s easy to criticize how the government is doing everything wrong, it’s harder to criticize it well, and it’s HARDER coming up with a succinct semi-coherent strategy approach plan for effective change. Ha! I in NO way feel I necessarily got it right, but I don’t think it’s a bad start.
Be kind in your comments. I’m guessing opinions on these things differ greatly.
-Christopher
Be kind in our comments? But how can we when such a nutso plan is proposed? From Krockous Bay to the Fork of the Tanzee and Prull rivers? Is he mad? Doesn’t he know what that would mean in terms of crops, people and infrastructure? Why doesn’t he just propose that a million humans just sell their Kwaladis and leave for the coast?! I mean come on! Next he’ll say that those who can do windmills should invest in geothermal and wave technology! Does he think they can train enough liberal professors for that too? Geez!
Hahahahaha! 🙂
Panel 7 – “integrate”. Other than that it sounds great!
Julie’s risking a human/anaarden conflict between herself and Koen.
“How do you achieve peace?? Uh, here, come hold my hands at the same time, the both of you.”
Ha! in this case it seems that Koen should have been the one using the suit… or maybe not, he would have gotten same results.
About criticizing government, yes, definitely they have a lot of things to be mad about, but I’ve always thought that most of the changes should come from us, we can’t rely only in goverment or leave it all to them…
“Institute a limitation on population growth.”
You mean like China’s one child, one family plan? The one that has resulted in orphanages flooded with baby girls? The one that has changed the natural population skew from about 105 boys born for every 100 girls to 118 boys for every 100 girls born?
Instituting population controls does not work. Educating people and allowing better access to reproductive health services and birth control will work.
Population control by decree takes a powerful and totalitarian government. Those types of governments need war. They also have command and control economies which are the most wasteful and least efficient economies of all. It’s a Leftist fantasy to believe a powerful government can save the environment. The more powerful the government, the more war, waste, and destruction you get.
In any event this conversation would never happen. The human nobles here are actually far too reasonable. The empires are racially based. Even if it started off as a war over resources, now it would just be about extermination and genocide, a true ‘total’ war. There would be no room in anyone’s hearts from these two empires for anything but endless hatred and fear of the other race.
Except if there is no check-and-balance system, the bullies take over, and what you get is a few people with too much and everyone else with too little, which sooner or later gets you war, waste and destruction. Gotta be a better way to do this…
Well, at least she just didn’t say “AIEEEEE” and melt their faces off.
Well, the US has a VERY “progressive” university system with 80% or more of professors self-identifying as liberals. At the same time, isn’t the United States the possessor of the most ferocious military on the planet, to boot? I used to be a cog in that military machine and I can tell you that nobody has seen the full potential of said military, even in conventional war. Remember Desert Storm, the Mother Of All Butt Kickings? Well, we’ve improved since then.
And dividing nations has really worked here on earth, eh? Korea and Vietnam ring a bell? How about the UN dividing up British Palestine?
I believe that nations once engaged will fight until one loses or until they both wear out. Peace only works when both sides desire peace or when one conquers the other and imposes it. Witness the Axis powers in WWII. Total victory by the allies stopped them. Now think of Korea. Stopped short of total victory and look at the mess there now. And remember the purges and massacres in Vietnam following the fall of Saigon when the US pulled out.
Step one: create killer virus.
Step two: set it free.
Problem “war” solved.
Okay, maybe it´s “replaced by bigger problems”.
Whatever.
For problems with partitioning, see also Kashmir.
I’ll also add the.general comment that large scale political change is hard because the current system works well enough for most of the people involved in it for the time being. Change means asking people to give up what they have now in favor of the unknown. And there are always at least a few people who are doing very well under the current system and therefore have a lot to lose. Most people are pretty risk averse when it comes to change on a personal level. To put a big change through government, the current situation has to be pretty bad for a sizeable maajority. Or you could have a loud, dedicated minority and a majority that does not have the will to oppose them.
I am aware of China, Korea, Vietnam, Kashmir, etc. I still stand by my points. But you all make excellent arguments.
Thank you for remaining civil.