Do you know, what is the ideology of your candidate during the election?

Do you know, what is the ideology of your candidate during the election?

One word more about political commercials, we should know who we are voting, what is the ideology of that group, and what kind of things it supports? The thing is that what if some politician starts to act in parliament against things, what has been promised during the campaign?

The problem with political campaigns is that they are made by the people, who are professional salesmen. They might write speeches to the politician, who might not even think about some things and the thing what those people, who are working in those campaigns are offering is the change to get a place in the political system.

At first, those people must get a candidate, who they would sell to people, who will give votes. Sometimes some people are saying that selling a politician to the people is the same thing as selling soap to customers. But at the first sales team must get a candidate, wh would believe them. And then they must get money for commercials because they must make sure, that people listen to their man. They must confess that their politician has something to give for the regular people.

Regular people are making a decision, who they will vote in the election. So the policy and the promises must be adjusted for pleasing the regular people and financial leaders. The thing is that there are more cleaners that top directors of enterprise companies. And in real elections only the votes, what are given have mean. If some candidate would get more votes than others, that means that the candidate has been elected.

And here I don't write about American way to elect presidents. There the number of electors, who are elected from each state is crucial. That means that the campaign makers are making focus, what states are important to them. And wich states would get less attention. And in the USA the person, who gets fewer votes can be elected to the president if the number of election men would be greater.

And at the last, I must say, that if those people, who would work in the election campaigns get their own man or woman in the top place of the political pyramid, that means that they would get a job, where is a good salary. They would be hired to next campaigns, and that is the reason, why the entire team must and will do their best in those cases.

Freedom and things, what could happen if...

Freedom and things, what could happen if...

Freedom is the thing, which sometimes causes very interesting thoughts, and at the beginning, we must realize that there are always people who misuse freedom. Those people believe, that they have the right to do everything, what they want, and that means that we must suppress the freedoms in every nation because freedom doesn't mean that people have right to harm other people or their property. Laws are made for protecting people against brutality, and that's why people must realize, that we must follow the rules because they are meant to consider every single person in that country.

They are made for giving common rules, how people should live, and that means if somebody takes too many freedoms in the nation, that person would get the punishment, and in that case, punishment is not made to please that inmate. This is the thing in the nation and state. State and its force are established to protect its citizens against despotism. This is the reason, why we have government and it's police force. If we don't follow the speed limits, we must realize that we should get punishment, because everybody else gets the punishment. 

And that punishment is ordered by the state and justice system. The principle of the use of the law on punishments that they must be relevant to the crime. That means that the person is justified because that inmate did something, not what could happen. That means only what really happened is justifying because if we would think every possible thing, what could happen if the person drives too fast.

There is, of course possible, that the car hits to the limousine of The President Of The United States, who has opened the nuclear briefcase, what drops on the floor of the limousine. And then the coffee cup is dropping on the red button, and all missiles could fly to Russia. But this thing just didn't happen, or maybe the president hides that information from the public media. Or maybe his wife or child fell the Coca Cola  in the morning on that briefcase, what has malfunctioned, and the missiles didn't go for that reason. 

This kind of things are very good topics for the thoughts, and sometimes some person has told the story that the Russian spies can destroy entire nuclear submarine or command center simply by falling lemonade on the command consoles. But those things are not things, what are handled in the court. 

Freedom is sometimes misunderstood for the right to make what the inmate wants. And this is the dangerous way to think. Many times we are seeing people, who are telling, that they have the right to say and do what they want. But when they should listen to other people, they would not even want to hear opposing opinions. In those cases, people have the right to say everything, what supports the leader's personal opinion. In fact, when we are looking in the mirror, we might face the truth, that we are sometimes quelling other people freedom to say their opinions in many places.

We are not willing to even ask children or incompetent person, what that inmate wants to do because we don't have to follow that opinion. But the law says, that even those people have the right to speak in the meetings and other places. So why we are always so hurried, that we don't have time to hear the opinions of those people? If we are above those people and make decisions, we might still ask, what those people like to do, and maybe after that make the decision, what might be similar, or different what those people want. 

Freedom of speech is freedom of think, and that is the thing, what we always repeating. We have religion and other types of freedoms, but when we are thinking what that freedom means very careful, we must remember, that people who say, that they have the right to believe things and that's it. But when some other person has some other kinds of opinions, they would order to keep their mouth shut. The situation is similar to the Soviet Union. People had the right to be atheistic, but if they had another kind of opinions, they were arrested.

Being smart or being wise that's the problem

Being smart or being wise that's the problem

Almost every time, when we are talking about wisdom, we are facing the proverb, that the smart person would survive from troubles, but the wise man would not ever go in those troubles, but is wise man smart? And what actually is wisdom? Is wisdom the thing, that we would grow a beard, and sit in some chair, and tell many things, what doesn't mean a thing? 

Or is the wisdom only the ability to double check everything, before we would do something? Sometimes the wisdom is mentioned only as of the way to say, that elder person is smart. So the smart young inmate is an only smart and smart old person is wise because that would tell people, about the respect of that elder person.

Smart is the world, which means the young person, who uses glasses, and make things, what sometimes are successful and sometimes not, and the wise man is the master, who supervises the work, and the reason, why master doesn't make mistakes is, that the master would not make practical work in that precise project. But in the process, what made that person the master, that master has someday before being the young student, who made mistakes. And mistakes are teaching the person.

But we can think, that states are also persons, and mistakes are teaching also states and state leaders about things, what they should not do. This is why we have national archives, that the results of the decisions can found from those files. So archives are the memory of the nations. Every person in the world are making mistakes, and if the person has a large working area, that means that mistakes have large scale influence, if they are made by the leader of the state.

And here we can continue to think about the wrong decision, and ask who is responsible that the wrong person is working as the leader of the state? The head of the state might be awful, but the thing is that regular persons have given their votes and support for that person, and that is the thing, what we must remember. They have allowed that person being the head of the state, and that's it. 

But when we are thinking about things like nuclear weapons, and the scientists, who have made those things, we are always facing the question, that who made decisions to get those weapons. And then we might make another induction thought, and ask, "should we get everything, what somebody can do"? If we see something nice in the shop, should we get that thing? That's another way to ask, should the military always get and produce everything, what science can give to those organizations?

And in this case, we must realize, that persons, who are creating weapons and make another kind of science are working for the governments, who pay their salaries. They must dare to say, people, if some weapon or equipment is too effective. And then we are facing the situation, that military commanders want always minimize their own losses, what makes war so brutal.

But those men are trained to make decisions what costs the life of own side or another side, and that commander might rather want to see that every loss of human lives happens on another side. After that, this man or woman can tell the president that the mission was successful and own losses were minimum. This satisfies the political leaders, and that's it.

That is the philosophy, why some weapons are getting in the arsenal. But the problems are the non-lethal weapons, what are making the conflicts more complicated and increase the will to use weapons against the opposite side. One of those non-lethal weapons is the opiate bomb. That bomb would stun the targets, and then the own troops can collect the guns away without human casualties. 

But also psychological weapons are very effective, and that means, in theory, the people on the opposite side would incite to rebel by using satellites, what are pushing air molecules by using electromagnetic radiation. That would allow creating the large-area virtual loudspeaker, which can cover the entire country.

The electromagnetic radiation would push the air molecules and cause the silent noise, which would be really influential to the people if that would continue a long period, and repeats the message simultaneously. If the targeted persons don't know about that kind of systems they are even more influential, and if it is using many weeks or months, that would cause interesting reactions in the mind of those people.