Mexico To De-criminalise Drugs.

[Onhell]

I've been lucky to have dinner with my desired female lol. however, UTOPIA is good. All the thinkers that have come up with such "perfect" worlds envision them as well-organized and run societies where everyone is happy. Brave New World and 1984 are "perfect" worlds but with a catch. It is pointed out that in fact they ARE NOT perfect and it is not that great of a world. those are, as Maverik pointed out, dystopias or for people with limited vocabulary, negative utopias.

 

[Anonymous]

"Utopia," from the Greek words for "no place" and "good place," first came into English in Sir Thomas More’s work Utopia (1516), a fictional account of a far away nation whose characteristics invite comparison with More’s England. More used his fictional Utopia to point out the problems present in his own society. Since then, writers have created utopias to challenge readers to think about the underlying assumptions of their own culture. Gulliver’s Travels (1726), by Jonathan Swift, seems at first to be a book of outlandish travel stories. Yet throughout the narratives, Swift employs his fictional worlds ironically to make serious arguments about the injustices of his own Britain. In utopian fiction, imagination becomes a way to explore alternatives in political, social, and religious life.

In Huxley’s time, the most popular writer of utopian fiction was H.G. Wells, author of The Time Machine (1895), The War of the Worlds (1898), A Modern Utopia  (1905), and many other novels. Wells held an optimistic view of the future, with an internationalist perspective, and so his utopias reflected the end of national divisions and the growth of a truly humane civilization, as he saw it. When Huxley read Wells's Men Like Gods, he was inspired to make fun of its optimism with his characteristically ironic wit. What began as a parody turned into a novel of its own -- Brave New World.

The brave new world of Huxley’s novel is not a "good place," and so it is not, in the strictest terms, a utopia. Huxley himself called his world a "negative utopia," the opposite of the traditional utopia. Readers have also used the word "dystopia," meaning "bad place," to describe Huxley’s fictional world and others like it.

Huxley’s dark view of the future opened a new door in fiction and seemed to revive interest in the old traditional utopian form by giving it a modern edge. George Orwell’s Animal Farm (1946) and 1984 (1949) build on the energy and meaning of their predecessor, Brave New World. In Fahrenheit 451 (1950), science fiction writer Ray Bradbury proposes a future society without history or literature, a dystopia of which Huxley’s World Controller Mustapha Mond himself would probably approve.

In the 1960s, Anthony Burgess imagined his own futuristic London in A Clockwork Orange, rehearsing the themes of control and the loss of self introduced by Huxley. And Huxley’s disturbing views of science and technology have even echoed in Thomas Pynchon’s Gravity’s Rainbow (1973), where the anti-hero, wandering the streets of London during the V-2 raids of World War II, discovers his own dark history of social (and sexual) conditioning.


So there!  :mellow:

 

[Anonymous]

Thanks for broadening my vocabulary, boys. Three against one though? Come on...

If we suppose that there is more than one utopia (ideal condition, place...), that various people may have various concepts of utopia, then total government control can be called utopia as well. Trust me, there *are* people who still believe in it. Which is what I meant when referring to Ascendancy's English teacher.

So there!

 

[Anonymous]

Three against one though? Come on...

Who said we were against you? Not at all! In fact, you turned the 'conversation' to a very interesting topic (have a praise for that!). 

I agree with you when you say that total governement control is pure rubbish (although you used other words!). A governement is supposed to be there for the good of the citizens, well in theory anyway. Absolute control in everything can satisfy some, but will frustrate a large quantity of others. Whereas a minimum of control is necessary -- in crime prevention, for instance (although it depends also on which 'crime' we're talking about, as there is a major difference between peacefully enjoying a spliff on a riverside and murdering a whole family to burgle their house in order to satisfy a heroin habit!) -- a lot of freedom should be granted -- within resonable limits too, of course!

On the other hand, there will always be a chunk of the population that will act like sheep, relying on their governement for almost everything and turning against it as soon as something doesn't quite go the way they want. I'm thinking here of France, where many people take to the street as soon as the tiniest problem occurs (this country is, to my knowledge, the only one where even the unemployed went on strike!), but it isn't the only nation where people think or act in a similar way.

Whether a utopia (or a dystopia as the case may be) is good or bad is a question of individual point of view, it seems. In 1984, the Proles are quite satisfied with their condition and don't want to change it, even if the situation horrifies Winston Smith and -- of course! -- the reader. Huxley's Brave New World is absolutely perfect for people like Lenina, although it causes a violent response from John the Savage, who completely rebels against it. Our current world is somehow a kind of hybrid of Orwell and Huxley's imaginary societies and some people are quite happy with it. However, and it's an inherent trait of human nature, we are all different and respond in various ways at the individual level, and many of us aren't satisfied at all.


How about dinner, then? 

 

[Anonymous]

Who said we were against you?

People who don't know me tend to misunderstand my attempts for humour

...(although it depends also on which 'crime' we're talking about, as there is a major difference between peacefully enjoying a spliff on a riverside and murdering a whole family to burgle their house in order to satisfy a heroin habit!)...

This is going to extremes, and even then, the system fails at times. Just recently, a 19-year old got 15 years in prison for repeated shop-lifting in order to satisfy a drug habit (the rule of Third time = severe punishment), while parents who mishandled their six-month-old daughter to death got away with two years...

...this country is, to my knowledge, the only one where even the unemployed went on strike...

Think again. In my country, they started burgling shops.

Whether a utopia (or a dystopia as the case may be) is good or bad is a question of individual point of view, it seems.

This is what it boils down to. We all know what how crushing the power of the majority is - the few outstanding people may indeed feel as outsiders and unhappy. In fact, I would go as far as saying that the majority of the people who made a difference in history weren't happy individuals.

How about dinner, then?

Fish and chips for me...

 

[Anonymous]

Just recently, a 19-year old got 15 years in prison for repeated shop-lifting in order to satisfy a drug habit (the rule of Third time = severe punishment), while parents who mishandled their six-month-old daughter to death got away with two years...

Well, I was merely talking about what is considered a crime, not the punishment itself. The system does fail occasionally, I'm aware of that. However, I noticed that coppers are usually more enclined to pester people for speeding on isolated roads or kids enjoying a spliff in a park, than to go after some crazed individual roaming the streets with a carving knife in his hand (this is a true story!).

Fish and chips for me...

I'll bring the vinegar, then. 

 

[Anonymous]

To me, Ascendancy's mistake looks more like improper editing than bad grammar...

On topic: Total government control is utopia. Just as a ban on drugs won't make people stop taking and selling them, legalisation will not make drugs into just another type of goods and thus less desirable...

Yeah. I meant to say "once said that". That's just lack of attention on my part. Sorry.