bishal

I think he is basically anarcho-communism (force of people in policiea) and basicaly thinks the capitalist would take over the power vaccum in free society. In simple term he thinks no government leads to control anyway. What you guys think?

I am thinking of starting a show for just reading (in short) about the good books which are already published or secret. The topics are overall issues ultimately or one by one: Anarchism, Economics, Atheism, Philosophy, self-knowledge, Science (quantum physics, super-concious???, meditation, who are we, etc), contemporary politics, education, parenting, Individual and freedom, other books which examines the history of religion, politics, communism and figures like: Marx, Lenin, Trotsky, other power hungry persons who are still admired by people today etc. and other good writers who were betrayed by control of information...more what you recommend. Thanks and please hint what is is about.

I think asking them to define Government would be better. But they will simply say if there was another guy in charge things would be different. Anyway I like to be universal (like: no can just choose good things or bad things happened and both parties arguing should consider both sides) in dealing with government fans. Means due to government society improves, ok fine with that, but crimes grew, poor are poorer, etc. are also during the the same government time. For the sake of argument, i will accept government increased prosperity (i nkow its not) but you must accept it also increased crime (and many other problems) as it happend during the same time. I don´t know how effective it would be. Anyway they will just say there was not enough regulation so its bad Its hard job to convience grown ups.

"Everything good is due to good government and everything bad is due to bad government." "The food we eat are of quality due to good government programs and the food that are of bad quality is due to bad government." "Russia had crisis coz Stalin was in charge but if Trotsky was in charge if would be better". I often get these argument but anyone, How to refute these good-bad argument?

I am obiously sure that the chldren of the elites are raised very peacefully without violence. Their primary care taker may not be their parents but will have loving care takers for them. Accoarding to pro-child (environmental) parenting what Stefan advocates, this child peacefully raised should not want to be a power hungry, money eater, psychopath who wants to control the society. But isn´t these families children do the same act of enslaving us even they are raised peacefully??

One experiment shows that people stills have 20th century mentality. They were told to give a shock of more than 400 volts to the other person on other side (no visual only screaming) most of them did it. And its horrible to hear and i am feeling enough is enough. "Words does not matter action does." If someone like Ron Paul has lied and won the Presidency and started doing good things like: undo the rules and regulations, expose the system, etc. without touching welfare and what people like first. I basically mean lying to expose the government not changing the economics, etc. As in the end the trend is that people always go after their leaders anyway. Would it be still justifiable?

I came to know that a child from birth to 3 years, brain develops and make connections with neurons thus enabling for a person to fell compassion, tolerance etc.in future? From 3 yeears brain is just maturing. After 3 years onld the brain is just maturing what neurons are connected to. So, my point is that a child who is 6 years old if was not raised peacefully (probably hitting also) will lose the connection of love or lets say his brain will be little disfunctional. I am just confused that can this state of brain (unconnected/unloved brain), which is already there, be altered/changed when he starts maturing? If yes how hard would it be and some steps to followed? E.g: I am a father who beats his child cannot show love in my son early age ( I mean till 3 years old). Now, suddenly i listened to Stefan and realized i was wrong and my parenting for discipline was worse one. Thus changed my behaviour to peaceful parenting from now on. Is it already too late coz child brain has already developed and I made it disfunctional? Please suggest...

Thanks you all for your suggestion... But i have to research myself more anyway

No one has the close to suggestion..Does anyone knows therapy or neurobiology? I have changed myself but asking i have done wrong for 6 years and the child is now agressive, what can i do..if the child stars hitting me or hitting his sisters or strangers or friends... How do i react? Please suggest without douging

Yeha i totally understand this.. But the childs brain/nerves are developed until the age of 3 after that its only being mature as the childs grow up. Lets say the child has no father for first 3 years and then the father returns... learning tolerance, etc. after 3 years would be difficult coz the brain is already made! So, my child is alredy agressive and his brain is made/connected accoardingly.. What would be the possiblity for good change after something already happens? Am i missing something here..

Now I realized that being tough is not how we raise our children but i used to be tough parent... Do you think its already too late to change the child behaviour who is already 6 years old?

Lets say not obeying anything, hitting parents or young ones if angry, being angry often, etc...Just think of a tough kid bullying also..

And what can we do as a parent once the child is already tough? Comments very appriciated.. Thaks