It's about moderation and presentation. Benji, you can't react this way every time someone does not "buy" your presentation.
I'm fine w odeon not agreeing because of a very important reason: Him agreeing changes nothing. He is only 1 person.
In reality, 1 person does not matter. One vote does not matter. One person alone can change nothing, and so on. This is reality, away from the whole "But look at Gandhi!"-bullshit
It's not important to convince as many people as possible of the unfairness that goes on in the world. It is interesting, though. If someone wants to listen, it is fun to tell them interesting things.
But with your attitude, you seem as if you're trying to tell people something very important, to save their lives, and they refuse to listen, so you get furious at their ignorance. You have to calm down, cus it's not that important. Yes, several of the on-going wars are constructed and there is nnnothing you can do about it.
You can "raise awareness", but even that won't even ammount to anything.
To the doubters, my 5 additional cents:
What do you think is most likely?
That electronics manufacturers sit and twiddle their fingers, waiting desperately for a good conflict? That they thank Jesus every morning for Congo, praying to Jesus every evening that the Kivu conflict - that practically builds half their fortune - will not end any time soon?
Read up on the Kivu conflict, it is the 6th "sub-conflict" or so, to have continued from the 1993(?) Congo war, which is a further continuation of a 1960s conflict, which is pretty much the entire existence of that country. The entire existence.
And yes, there is such a thing as bad luck. Congo could just be having bad luck.
There is such a thing as good luck too. Finland has exceptionally good luck with Congo's bad luck.
And that's where I get suspicious, that these things work out so well.
As always, I can prove nothing, but this isn't some "deep dark secret". I'm talking about conflict minerals here. It's well known.
Much more obscure is the "real truth" of ISIS, for example. Here I am more unwilling to explore details, because there's less to explore. I just find it too convenient. At the beginning of the Iraq invasion I saw high tier statements claiming the US were "meant" to stay physically in Iraq indefinitely. "At least 50 years"
Ever since, it has been presented as a short lasting invasion, one that will end as soon as possible. Now it seems like the barely mentioned "50-year-plan" is actually in effect, but... "hidden", "secret"
Seems, mentioned, claimed, convenient, that's all I got really. But it's naive to think that people would "surely not" exploit a horrible situation such as war. Weapons manufacturers are #1 profiteers. "Surely they feel terrible about earning money from conflict! I mean, weapons manufacturers are hardly cynical people >:I"
was it something I said?