As a companion thread to 'Boycott the Arms Industry', which is focussed quite specifically on a task to deliver information and well worth reading and supporting, I thought I would start this one. The idea is that rather than gum up that thread, you can all gum up this one.
I was just thinking about imagination.
I wonder if it's more difficult to imagine a machine that works really well and does something useful, without it actually having anything to do with warfare.
I wonder if Trevithick's Engine or Stephenson's Rocket was designed as a weapon.
The beautiful irony is that we talk to each other, can communicate this concept and work to publish the information... on the Internet - which was originally a military network.
Almost all technological advance has been due to conflict. Roman roads were designed straight for logistical purposes and built to last - for propaganda? Even superglue was developed as a field dressing.
The problem is that companies and governments profit from conflict, yet speak of peace.
This thread is to define how to promote a singlular view that this is not acceptable.
It's OK saying, you can hurt them by not buying their products or using their services, but that is somewhat pointless as individuals and will have minimal impact. It is also almost completely unavoidable.
Apparently, there is a telecommunications chip in all mobile phones that was developed in a country where conflict is part of everyday life. A friend told me this recently. Am I supporting that regime by using my mobile?
9/11 terrorists were said to have communicated by mobile phone.
Should the facility be withdrawn from us all, so that it doesn't happen again?
Would we have arrived at these technological advantages, just purely by the ingenuity of our species?
Do we need something to fight against in order to focus our minds to a task?
Pasteur, Curie and Fleming were certainly in conflict with bacteria and virii, but of course you could say there discoveries were accidental.