Hues

When I was low I used to think of you
And life would seem better, a rosier hue.
Then day by day I had to learn again
That things change, that you can’t be afraid.

Little by little, you closed in on your wish
Convinced of it legitimacy, we went to the brink
Propelled by a haze of jealousy and fear
Disguised by your happiness, of when I was near.

After so much time you still didn’t know
Where I wanted my hopes and dreams to flow.
We parted, but the sorrow was more than that
Because you knew who I should be, but not who I am.

Now my daily world is a little bit greyer
And I continue alone, but you too my dear.
Sometimes I wonder if you’ll ever find your truth
And if you know that life now, has a gloomier hue.

Democracy

I've been thinking a lot about politics of late, wondering just how much of a democracy we in the UK are. Now, I've never studied politics, but my impression is that a democractic government represents and acts for it's population, through the process of elections. The government's basic role is to carry out the will of the people and maintain public institutions such as schools, the emergency services, benefits etc, and maintain international dialogues for trading, culutural purposes etc. Obviously it's role is more complicated than this, but that is what I understand as the basic purpose of government.

Now when the UK went to war against Saddam Hussain, it was claimed (maybe or maybe not through genuine belief) that Saddam Hussain had Weapons of Mass destruction and that it was in the interests of Iraq, and the UK and USA to remove him from power. As far as I can remember (and I may be wrong), the UK was told of Blair's justification for wanting to go to war. With this knowledge, over a million people still protested against it - and those were just the ones that could be bothered to go out and demonstrate. Given the size of the demonstrations, in a true democracy wouldn't this have made the government at least publically reconsider the war? Now I'm sure they didn't want to appear as weak, but in the end, it isn't the minsters that fight those wars; it's the army, people from the general population. Why didn't the government even make an attempt at pretending to have listened? Not that that would have made it better, but it wouldn't, in my opinion, have been such a blatabt flouting of democratic principles.

To make matters worse, turns out their reason for starting the war was invalid anyway, but by that time it was too late - Saddam Hussain was no longer in charge and the country was (and is?) in a state of near collapse. What bugs me now though, is that there seems to be a general perception that Iraq was invaded as part of the retaliation against 9/11. Everyone seems to have forgotten about Afghanistan.

Anyway, I digress. My point (longwinded though it is!), is that I don't think there is enough accountability in this country. Ministers should make an active effort to justify the policies of their departments, and where possible, get relevant and real people's opinions on how they will be affected. A long speech everynow and again isn't good enough. If the government is really the political representation of the people, then they should be actively engaging the public becuase they believe they should - not because they have to.

In the words of Douglas Adams, maybe it's true that:
'Anyone capapble of getting themselves made president should on no account be allowed to do the job'

Solutions anyone?!

On understanding.

For quite a long time now, I've thought that knowing why you believe something is really important; that when you do something, you should know why you're doing it and not just because someone told you so. After all - it's your life, shouldn't you be allowed, as an adult, to make the decision on whether something is a good/desirable use of your time?

I've always wondered what the world would be like if every single human being knew why they were doing something. I don't mean on the basic level of 'they did this, so I'm doing that'. I mean at a deeper level, of why their action provoked your reaction. Why your culture values something over another thing, why other people might accept something that you can't, and why you choose to accept the beliefs that you do.

My theory has been that if people did behave this way, there would be a lot less fighting (though still some I'm sure), a lot more understanding and hopefully, more peace.

But everynow and again, I wonder if it really is such a good idea. In theory, I have no problem with it (unless someone comes up with a good reason why I should!), but is it really practical? Personally, I naturally try and see things from other people's point of view - to try and see why they're doing what they're doing, because if I disagree, I might be able come up with a more viable reason why, or if I agree - I know why I agree. But this creates the problem of being in a constant state of flux. I'm so busy trying to understand other people's thoughts and get into their heads, that often I end up doubting my own ideas, constantly questioning if I'm really happy with my values and beliefs.

Some people may think this is a healthy thing (which again, I agree with in theory), but in practice, this means that when someone challenges your ideas, you may not sound as convincing as you know you should, because you're always open to having your ideas changed. In theory (is there another word for theory?!), if you've properly considered all the opinions known to you, then you should be fine with defending your own. But again, in practice it's not always so easy to consider every opinion presented to you so thoroughly - there is only so much time in the day to think after all.

So while I still like this way of thinking and living my life, it does create difficulties, and at times lonliness, because in a sense you are alienated from the people of your culture who don't know why they're doing what they're doing (which in mine is possibly most of them). Like they say, 'ignorance is bliss' and in this case it may be true. From my observations, people who strongly believe in something (excluding all the crazy psycopaths/murderers/people who generally harm others etc) are usually part of a community and get a sense of belonging from that.

But possibly, partly because of the way I think, I don't have that sense; the feeling of really belonging anywhere. And this makes me envy those who do hold strong beliefs that can't be swayed, and makes me wonder - maybe understanding isn't as important as I think it is?

On happiness

Been meaning to link to this for *ages* but I just re-read it so here it is:

Is Happiness Enough?

It's basically I debate I had with myself a lot when I was growing up which this person articulates quite well. I also think the point he makes about ignoring the suffering on your own doorstep is a very true one. Maybe because it's easier to deal with suffering that you mainly experience through words and a tv screen? When it's where you live, it's harder to look at it objectively sometimes, and easier to see it as something that is just part of the area - that would be too hard to change. Maybe because if it's where you live, there's that possibility that you are partly responsible for it - because you are part of the society that has developed a situation where some people are well off and some people struggle to pay the rent.

But these are just the musings of a girl. There are times when I wonder if it's even worth trying because the task of trying to make the world a better place just becomes harder and harder the more I learn about it.