thelegendarystudentbread-blog

[thelegendarystudentbread-blog]

Why do we care?

This week we discussed with Kishore public policy, economy and social justice. One topic that stood out to me were ethical discussions in society. Therefore it is again worth a look on one of the major topics discussed in society nowadays. Abortion triggers so many different things in a person. It can be pain, frustration, anger or relief. But why is it such a big topic that it decides over elections, love and hate? Why does it trigger so many emotions and passions, whether it is Pro-Life or Pro-Choice? Because it decides in what society we live in.

About a year ago I strongly believed that abortion is certainly a choice. It depends on the mother if she can and is capable of keeping the baby. And that it is her decision, because she is the one often times being left alone with it. And it is for sure of nobody’s business to decide for a woman about something so intimate. And when we look at Pro-Choice arguments, they definitely have clear points and valuable points. But as we dig deeper into these arguments it tells a whole different story. The root of the argument is certainly not abortion or the baby in itself. It talks about women's rights, autonomy and value. Therefore the actual discussion is not about abortion, it simply distracts from the motivation behind it.

What made me change my opinion, and seeing abortion in a different light, was realizing the value of a baby already when it is still in the womb. Weirdly whenever someone has a planned pregnancy the talk is about a baby. No one would probably tell the family, that they are having a fetus. The word changes as soon as it is unwanted. Yet the most people have their reasons against abortion, not because they hate the mother or question their value. Most times their focus is on the baby, whereas concerning the talk for abortion, the focus is on the mother. Further it is the concern in what kind of society we want to live. Countries like Iceland, with a 100% abortion rate on Babies that carry a high risk on Down-Syndrome, create a society for perfectionism. It pushes the line for general understanding of how a society is suppose to look like, where some humans are worth living and some are not. Which when the first step is taken, will have room of a vanished view on the value of human.

In the end it is not about Pro-Life or Pro-Choice, as if we could break a society or people down to that. And neither can we the discussion, it is about the image in what kind of society we wanna live. The people crying out for the right of abortion, mostly are seeking woman’s rights and want to be respected in their opinion. And the people against abortion mostly don’t want to live in a society that determines who has the right to live and who does not. It is not about a two-party-discussion, when the roots and intentions address totally different issues in the first place. For sure the discussion about abortion will go on, because it is a very serious topic. In that although it should be clear, what the actual concerns are standing behind.

[thelegendarystudentbread-blog]

Devastating charity

Almost all of us have donated clothes or send some money to people in poverty. Most of the times we don’t get to see where it will end and its actual impact.This is portrayed in the documentary “Poverty Inc.” (2014) that shows the consequences and gives the ones affected actually a voice.

• aid is not help

How can we actually help the poor? And what if all the help that we are pouring out over millions so gracefully and generously actually does more harm than good? The Aid and the literally thousands of NGOs that are putting all their effort into ending poverty, manifest and even create it. To be honest I got convicted of how I view the poor in the first place. People that need help, need my old clothes and need a sponsorship. Because it’s all of those things what I have plenty of, therefore they need that. But what if they need something I don’t have? A good start of is to ask what the poor want, most will probably say a stable job.

• the potential

What does it mean affirming somebody's value? Giving them clothes? Helping them out? Or acknowledging that they do have potential themselves? That they have dreams, talents, skills, passion and courage. Helping is about a partnership to support them in providing the right platform and believing in their potential. So many in poverty are totally capable of starting their own business. Giving entrepreneurs the chance to start a business and create wealth. When a country can create a stable market allows the population to prosper and flourish in their potential.

Therefore what really makes poverty history is trade not aid.

[thelegendarystudentbread-blog]

The thing with the fish

“Give a man a fish and he will be full for a day. Teach a man to fish and he will never hunger again.” Very wise words for a generation that is so used to spray perfume on a casket. A little pity for the broken, but no comfort. This week Andrew taught us a whole different perspective on the poor and aid. And why poverty is still not history.

• helping..

Liking photos of a poor child in Africa won’t feed it that’s for sure. We actually need to help, actually need to do something! So send clothes, donate some money and start your fight against poverty, right? But what if that doesn’t help? Further, harms? There are so many good hearted people in the world that truly wanna help. Unfortunately sending aid isn’t helping, it’s harming. Imagine someone has an accident, for sure he needs first aid. And this will save his life, but once he is in hospital there comes a point where the urgent care has to step back and lead the patient into the process of recovery. So that the patient can slowly get back to his strength and walk on his own feet again. Seems logical . So why aren’t we letting the poor out of urgent care? After the earthquake in Haiti, there are still over 10.000 NGOs aiding to the people. An emergency situation has become permanent stage.

• competition aid

So what can we actually do to help the poor? This might be exactly the wrong start already. How can we support the poor so that they can help themselves? Give them the platform to do so. Meaning give them access to the free market and the rights of law. It’s not how we can teach them to catch a fish either. What if they already know how to catch a fish? The Aid gets harmful when a young businessman is trying to compete with free goods. It’s a circle. The poor can’t start a business because no one would by something since all is free, they end up being poor and needing aid.

So since Aid is not as effective as we wish it would be, what can we actually do? It’s not about defending poverty it’s about creating wealth. How do you create wealth? Through access to a free market with rights. So we could start with something, stop giving aid after the pass of an emergency stage.

[thelegendarystudentbread-blog]

The price of a game

Enthusiasm spreading over the ranks, a passion that has almost been lost igniting in people's heart, unifying strangers for one thing: a ball. Cheer is rising up when it flies right into the enemy’s heart! We have conquered! We have won! A goal! And the whole world is watching.

• unifying

Indeed it is an event that brings the world closer together. Nations can be patriotic on a neutral base. Soccer World Cups and other international sport events like Olympia are big in topic. With the upcoming FIFA World Cup in Russia, we have to look at the implications more carefully. It is an event where millions can cheer for their country and be proud. Not only brings it the nation and it’s people closer together in unity, but you find a common ground with cultures that seem so different. A ground where passion can erase and understanding, a ground where you can treat others in a respectful manner. Even more for the host country it is an honor to literally represent this plattform. As well to be in the spotlight of the world to be able to show its beauty, diversity and uniqueness. For sure it has economical benefits in form of tourism and construction industry. The host nation can be proud and engage with wrong perceptions and prejudice of its nature. To attract more tourist in the future and show themselves on a different side, like South Africa, a nation was able to represent its good side in the most glorious way.

• the footprint in the dark

The glory has its price. With the last World Cup in Brazil the results where more than evident. The nation was indeed proud and honored to be able to host the world event for their national sport. A sport that is such a part of their culture, you could say it is ingrained in their blood line. To take aside the pride and honor. The World Cup had an impact no one wanted to see. A great number of construction workers, where one of those who had to pay the price with their life. Due to the high pressure of building the ginormous stadiums in such a rapid time and with financial cuttings, the safety was left behind. The money that was supposed to finance the whole event came mostly from the middle class, for the corruption has too much of an impact. Dilma “bought” the lower class, with the “Bolsa Família” and rode the nation into a debt that needs to be payed of for the next 40years. The world only got to see the surface of the chain of brutal protests breaking out in the nation. People got angry that the government would invest so much money for a short time event, before littarly feeding their own people. On top of that all the stadiums and hotels are now empty, not for any use, a waste of money.

What does it mean for next World Cups? Should there be an index that only nations who can actually afford it are allowed to be a host? Or would that imply discrimination and the withholding of the honor for poor countries to be a host? Would that cause “buying” the right to be a host? To have the honor? What does it mean for Russia? What is going to happen on the dark side? Should the world pay more attention or is it an national issue to be dealt with internely?

Who does have the power and authority to decide whether it would be more of an honor than a disaster? There are too many roles taking a play, for some it might be a win and for some a lost.

What is the price for the winners hand?

[thelegendarystudentbread-blog]

Gunfire

With the Rancho Tehama school shooting this week and the Sutherland Springs shooting recently the never ending debate about the gun law comes up again. For sure it is written in the constitution, but due to countless events happening every year, we should start to rethink how we approach the gun law.

• The everyday threat

How does it come that 93 Americans are killed through guns everyday? The gun homicide is 25 percent higher than in the average developed nation. It seems like there is a constant danger to be killed not from a threat like terrorism, but even closer from home. There are too many children who accidentally shoot their parents or siblings. Too many teenagers that grab the father's gun and run amok in their schools that they hate. Too many accidents that a gun fired per accident. And too many times people not even capable of their own selves firing out of their emotion or rage.

• The power is in your hands

Ultimately it is a weapon that you have the power to kill someone with. Although it is a sport and part of the culture, one small bullet can have such a big impact. Since the constitution was written the weapons changed, they became more precise, powerful and automatic. And for sure since it is part of the culture it is hard to forbid it completely. In fact it wouldn’t work out. There are several people who know how to handle a gun well and with respecf of it. As a sport, for hunting or protection. But we should come back to the place of having more respect for the power behind it. Seeing it as a tool that needs to be handled with caution, and certainly not a toy.

The major point is to not only treat the weapon with caution, but also be have more caution to whom we give access to them. There are so many responsible people, but so many are not tol. It is not a question whether they should be allowed, but to who?

More how can we apply the gun right to be a right and not a threat?

[thelegendarystudentbread-blog]

Suicide Romance

Every girl loves to cry when letting their heart go in a hopless romantic movie. Nicholas Sparks and several other authors and movie directors have won the hearts of thousands. Including the movie “Me before you” (2016) that was based on the novel from Jojo Moyes. Where it talks about the story of a young woman carrying for a handsome disable man, that fall in love but he ends up with Euthanasia.

• Why it’s not okay

One major topic why I criticize the movie very hard is because it delivers a total wrong perception of suicide. No matter how much it is his own will to not wanting to live any longer, since when would we support suicide from any sort of family member? Suicide itself is not a physical problem. Although it might seem like he obviously can’t move a lot and is in a lot of pain, the real reason behind it was already in his psyche. He was already dead before she even had arrived. If you pay close attention you will hear that the very reason why he can’t live any longer is, because is old self is gone. Which is in fact a mental perspective. Since he took his whole identity out if the things he was able to do in his previous glamours life, are now gone, there is no other way how he could live is life any longer. He doesn’t try to see the chance that he still has neither does he see the people that love him dearly. There are great examples like Nick Vuijic that are able to master a life with such intense boundaries. The movie “The Intouchables” (2011) draws a whole different perspective of this as well.

• savior instinct

When watching the movie all you actually see and feel is her. The movie is basically about her trying to save him. To take such a serious issue as Euthanasia and romanticize it is almost ridiculously untactfully. You barely get to see the actual pain and struggle that he goes through. Further it is concentrated on her savior instinct. A woman with a boring and unmeaningful life like hers gets the chance to save a disabled young man, that happens to be very handsome and rich as well. Her perception of “I can make you happy” is ridiculous and selfish. Neither does he give her meaning, nor is she the source of his happiness. That it is not more than a little fantasy of her, rather than actual care. The wrong dream goes on when he ends up dying and leaving her a lot of money and she is happily starting of a new life being in Paris. She doesn’t have to deal with any sort of remorse and further with responsibility. If she actually would have been able to “rescue” him, she would have to care for him the rest of his ir her life, soon he wouldn’t be as handsome anymore and she would have to face the reality of not only having to cook tea and having a little romance on the side

We really have to watch out when watching movies like this. They soon can deliver false perceptions into our hearts. A topic like Euthanasia wrapped in a heartbreaking romance is dangerous, because it feeds the unhealthy dream of the woman saving the men. This is a very devastating habit, because women can’t save and change men. But feeding the younger generation of girls that this can actually happen is something where we have to be very careful with how a movie is filtered through.

Or do you think Euthanasia is a romantic topic?

[thelegendarystudentbread-blog]

Filter

When you look at the current news from the States you will be flooded with scandals about what Trump has messed up again with something and behaves like a total child. Granted he might not be the greates person in the world and surely not the most ideal president, but yet he is the president right now and he should respect that. Further we should have a look at the question behind it: How true are news?

• the filter behind it

It doesn’t even have to be that the news agencies are spreading lies all over the world. Surley this is not supposed to be one of those conspiracy theories, further a shout out for awareness. Whenever we get news presented, they shape our opinion in some way. In that it doesn’t even matter if all the news we hear is true, further what truth is presented. The greatest enemy of the truth is the half-truth. We only hear one side of the story or further don’t hear about important events that accure, while the media is still debating a very controversial fairly unimportant topic. This might not happen per accident, but it’s up to the reader, what and how he filters. So can it be that you think about Donald Trump being an embarrassing and non-computable president, because all you hear in the news is about how he just couldn’t shout his mouth again. Which might be true and still not all he does is wrong. Say he would become a saint tomorrow, the media would still find something to blame him for.

• Not the big picture

Since we only hear about news mostly from one perspective or nation, we might have to consinder that there are a good amount of other things happening in the world as well. The majority of the people don’t know what’s going on in Brasil, Europe, China, Australia and so on. Not that we always have to know everything that’s going on in the world,certainly not it would just be too much to take in. But we might realize how so many things are connected. Due to Globalization and Internet the world moved closer together in economics and politics. Likewise how it used to be in history books it is happening in today’s world. Actions and descisions from a government or economic power always had an impact on other nations in contact and caused them for a reaction. If we get to realize that all ties together we might understand as well that the news we see everyday are the outcome of events and a story before that. You could get a totally wrong picture when you hear about for example a new bill, without knowing that there was an event happening that provoked this bill. Without the understanding of the whole situation, it’s easy to judge single actions.

How you personally could start to filter yourelf would be the sources themselves. In terms of authenticity, as well political orientation. The magazine might tend to write more liberal and the other blog more conservative. There is nothing wrong with the information sources having an opinion, but you need to make yourself aware of what sort of opinion they tend to hold. The more sources with authenticity and the more global sources the better we get to have an understanding of what is really going on.

What is your source?

[thelegendarystudentbread-blog]

How to transform

We all have big dreams and visions at some point. So many evil and injustice accures on a daily basis, most often right infront us. And yet our hands seem bound, a problem greater than our understanding and way beyond the possible. That’s at least what it seems like, this week we were able to learn the starts and strategy for such a vision under the lead of Derek and Allan.

• first step

No, we don’t need to be superheros to change a community. But the ones who step out and start to help the community to transform itself are in my eyes indeed heros. The most important thing to Note beforehand is that you will never come into the community and be the omniscient hero who has to save the sinking ship, rather you come in as an advocater, so the community can help itself. To start of you have to know what is in your hands. What is it that the community has, not what it doesn’t have. The so called “SWAT- Analysis” is very helpful in that. It describes what you are doing and capable of and how you will get there. It stands for Strength, Weakness, Opportunity and Threat. This describes an analysis before starting of with a project and to make yourself aware of the situation and circumstances.

• when you take action

After you have identified the Strenghts, Weaknesses, Opportunities and Threaths for yourself and the community you can start to take action. Community Development is a hugh area with a wide range of diversity of action. This is due to the fact that you always have to adjust and pick the community where they’re at. “Maslow’s hierarchy of human needs” might be helpful for a more specific picture. Since some communities need basic needs like water, food or shelther, others lack in a social community. It might be that the community needs a weel or better health care. Another might need more teachers or a kindergarten. Whatever the need is and whatever the action to it. We always have to come back with the question, whether it will be actually helpful. So can it be that there is a hospital nearby with the car, but the community simply has no car. As well it might not be the things that you might think needs to change, because it is still a different culture

To break it down, it’s good to have an overview of where you are getting into. An overall picture of the situation. But when it comes down to specific you need to be specific, but also tie in the community. It is always a working together, and you will probably never have the solution ready to adapt. But you can start of asking the right questions and giving the community a platform to take action on.

Are you gonna take the initiative?

[thelegendarystudentbread-blog]

Orphan

Time for a classic. The movie “Good Will Hunting” (1997) has probably melted the heart of millions. Is it due to the fact that the genius is not a elite boy but a street kid? Or to the ups and downs and the pain of life? The passion of a men fighting for a future for a young men? Or is it just the character of Will Hunting, portrayed by Matt Damon, in such a sassy, unique and sympathetic way?

• the orphan

On thing that stands out the most in the movie is probably the orphan mentality of Will Hunting. And although he is certainly a genius it still doesn’t change the fact the he lives in the orphan mentality. How could he possibly else wise? The only thing he ever knew was being rejected, he didn’t let people come close to him and left before he could be left. This behavior was labeled as rebellious and stupid, due to fact how careless he played with his future. People couldn’t understand how he could throw away so much opportunity. Nevertheless he was surley not stupid, he was hurt. The reason because he couldn’t grasp his opportunity was because it was not in his mindset that he could. An authority person telling him what to do was never the key, his friend was necessary to open up his eyes. He didn’t need a commander forcing him to change his mind, but an advocater provoking him to rethink his mindset.

The only person who could break through to him was someone that stepped into a place that was long gone. A father. His identity was never fasten. The most impactful scence was when the counsler told him “it is not your fault!”, it showed and broke down the wall that he built around his heart for so long. He picked him up where his heart was at not where he wanted him to go. How can you expect a young man to start off with life without having a foundation? In the eyes of the world and every “healthy” human mindset it might seemed ridiculous that he blew so many opportunities that others fight, dream and work so hard for. But when you consider where he was coming from it was the only possible thing to do.

You don’t even have to be an orphan to have an orphan mentality, often times it can be a lack of good partenhood or leadership. In the end it is worth it to invest in someone and dig out the gold in them. The most act rebellious not because they don’t appreciate it, but because no one has ever done it before.

Who are you investing in?

[thelegendarystudentbread-blog]

The threat

Terrorism might not always be bomb attacks. One form of terrorism that shoked the world over and over again happened recently in New York, before all over the world in like London or Berlin. The vehicle-ramming attacks are without the threat of a bomb still very effective.

• the puropse of terrorism

For sure one of the things terrorist wanna achieve is killing people. Which might be more effective with a bomb rather a vehicle. But the actual point of terrorism is spreading fear. The odds of a bomb going off every moment might be high, but they have to face way to many security problems. With a car being a weapon it seems like the military’s and special forces hands are bound. It is impossible to control every single car that might crash into a crowd. As well the constant thread of this happening is way higher than a bomb going off due to the lack of security.This all bounds the subconscious, constant fear. The goal of the terrorist is, that you can’t feel safe anywhere anymore.

• hopeless fight?

The purpose as well is to make the authoritys feel helpless and the population unprotected. To give the illusion of them having power. This is the very reason why it is not hopeless. They don’t have power, because they only do if we let them to. Under all these attacks lay even more that have been prevented. And still it is threatening that a car could crash into a crowd every moment, but for the effectiveness’s sake it is more like likely for it to happen in a big crowd. Those can be controlled and protected by the military or police. Through hindrences letting no car or truck trough and so on.

After all the one thing that shouldn’t happen is be knocked down by fear. Although those attacks are horrific and no way to understand what can drive someone to do something so evil. It is necessary to never lose hope.

Because when you lose hope, that’s when they have actually won.

[thelegendarystudentbread-blog]

The circle of weapons

Weapons are always exported and produced for what? It might seem ironic that a country will sign peace contracts at the one side and export weapons at the other. So why is it part of a daily basis for a country's trade plan?

• the paradox

Do they really expect to have peace in a nation, when they keep on selling the weapons to war-zones. This might come out of the mindset if you kill the “bad guys” all that left is peace and harmony. Is it? You might claim it as a support for the weak and fighting for the good, but if we keep on fighting there is still gonna be a war. In fact there will always be someone who seeks selfish ways and will not try to benefit for the community. Others might wanna trade and talk the “bad guys” down to peace. But this seems further naive and like rainbows and sunshine. So how effective is it to send weapons to warzones for peace?

the motive

The reason why this concept doesn’t work is simply because the intention of the weapon companies might not be peace in the first place. Why would a weapon manufacturer want a war to stop? He wouldn’t be able to sell any weapons anymore. Peace is not profitable. Further it is the government that mostly seeks economic prosper for their own country, which is funded by the weapon industry. The price to pay, for peace and economic growth in the first world nations, is war and exploitation in the third world nation. And now we wonder why so many refugees are coming in floods. The very nations that accepted the refugees, are mostly the same that exported the weapons in the war zone they are coming from.

To make peace without war

If it seems so ridiculous why is it still happening? The answer is money and profit. Although the profit is debatable. Would you call it a profit if it’s the cost of hundred thousands? So how can we help the weak to defeat themselves? If we actually help the weak to defend themselves. Only sending weapons for the sake of selfish profit, won’t solve the problem and won’t give people their life and homes back. Denying weapons won’t help them for the shortcut either. A start would be more open transactions of the government and industry to whom and how many weapons are being sold to. Actual attendants for a conversation with the offenders.

Neither a constant weapon export nor only conversations will bring peace to a nation. It would be way more beneficial to seek for the motives of the “enemy”, as well their perspective on the situation. If we understand, we can engage to find a way how on their level would be a chance for peace. Of course we have to keep the oppressed in mind and actually work as an advocate between the parties, rather than “helping” for the situation to totally escalate. 

What do you think would actually bring peace?

[thelegendarystudentbread-blog]

When the king speaks

This week the king of Saudi-Arabia, removed eleven princes, four ministers and several generals of the military. As well several got imprisoned almost over night. He gave a lot of their power now to his son. This accursed due to corruption and abuse of power and position on the sides of the princes, generals and ministers.

• the watcher

There might be several countries in this world that would need a controlling power of the powerful. Corruption is a worldwide issue and causes a country to fall apart from the inside out. A king, like in Saudi-Arabia, or an institution that has the power to do so, is very helpful for the society and effective for the fight against corruption. Since the oppressed part of society won’t have the power to claim justice, when the ones that are supposed to do so are unrighteous. This is were an observant, a watcher ties in, because we can’t rely that the people in high position are going to do all for the benefit of society. That might be an independent committee, a representative institution or a monarch.

the one

The benefit of a monarch is, he is only one. The contrary side is, he is only one. For years and centuries kings, queens and imperators were the rulers of the world. No one questioned the fact that there is only to be one person ruling a country. The idea of a democracy and so on are quiet young ideas and concepts. Since the “outdated” idea of a monarch, still has its history to it, it might be worth looking at. For sure either the people were lucky or not in the character of the monarch. There were wise, cruel or megalomaniacal and depending on this the population was in poverty or prosper. And yet the country ruled by just one person gives its order in a way that goes over the faction of so many.

• Back to old ways?

For sure it wouldn’t be wise to suddenly set a king for every nation. Neither would it to start of a democracy or and other political system. Too often we tend to believe that democracy is the only way to lead a country the proper and rightful way. Although there will be several nations totally collapsing, when stretched to a democracy. Not because the country is still in the process of being formed into one, further it is simply not the right system. There are countless different political systems in this world, which is a good thing. Because there are so many unique countries and cultures with their own history and worldview, that it would be even ridiculous to believe there could be such a thing as one political system suitable for all. And one of those others might be a monarchy.

What might be the best system for your country?

[thelegendarystudentbread-blog]

The equation of science

Math. A simple word can stir up so many feelings. I myself was never good at math, chemistry, biology or physics. But what if I told you that this week I totally fell in love with Science? Not that I would have magically understood any equations or reactions, unfortunately I am still pretty bad with numbers and understanding the periodic table. Further Derek's teaching on Science changed my view in a sense of a redefinition or original definition.

• childlike science

Does this mean that Math, Physics, Chemistry and so on are not Science anymore? Sure they are. But it’s not the equation and numbers that makes it science it is the question and the motivation behind it. The fascination of the world and the longing to be able to explain and know it. The digging deeper in the wonders of this world, searching, inventing and then applying the gained knowledge to improve their potential. Every child is fascinated by science until they get taught it’s definition wrong. Wherefore? How? For what? And the big why question might be sometimes very annoying for parents. But it is the natural intention to seek knowledge and to improve the world around us. When did we lose that?

how to ask...

For sure we shouldn’t make fools out of ourselves in asking “Why?” every second. Further asking the right question is the key to the heart of science. Some that don’t imply an answer, but one that has one. If the theory is working without the practical, you asked the wrong question. It needs perseverance and endurance to find an answer most of the times. It is not about copying others, but using it as a foundation to search for the unknown answer. This implies a lot of failing and stumble, but you will gain the knowledge that the way you tried wasn’t the right one. As well it can happen that while “recopying” it, you might do the same mistake as the one before you.

the fact

The reason by so many people back off of asking the right question is because they couldn’t like the answer. As simple and stupid as it sounds, in fact you might find out that something that you were convinced all you life is true, suddenly turns out to be untrue. Most people chose to deny the truth or they just won’t take the risk of the chance being faced with reality. Indeed the chances are high, because one instant that speaks against the truth already disproved it. That’s why there are tons of “exceptions” in math etc., because it would take another truth to fully tie in all possibilities. Which would take an immense amount of effort as well almost a promise to be at the same point again.

So what is Science now? It is a seeking for understanding and knowledge with the application for improvement. This is what keeps people asking and seeking. It is a starving for progress and ascent of mankind. And it all can start with a simple “Why?”.

[thelegendarystudentbread-blog]

The only man on planet

We are so used to routine and our everyday life that we don’t even think about what we do. Further we don’t think about what could happen, if we couldn’t do simple things like showering, buying groceries, doing laundry or going for having a chat with your family?

The movie “The Martian” (2015) challenges our mindset with what we lost all of our comfort. Portrayed with an astronaut gotten left behind on mars forcing him to use all the resources in the most outstanding and creative way in order to survive until they can come and get him.

• Back to the basic

Most of us probably wouldn’t be able to light up a fire, without any lighter or matches. Neither how to exactly built a proper shelter that last longer than the next rain or building weapons for hunting. Although this sounds more like survival training or stone age conditions, as well this was none of the things he actually had to do in the movie it still underlines the circumstances. He had a shelter, shower and some food, but on the other hand side, no water, no communication and no food that will last. So what was it that was so remarkable? The way he used the resources, to provide himself water, communicate and started planting on a planet where you don’t even have air to breath.

the potential

The ultimate thing what made the astronaut survive, was how he used the supplies he had. To do so it was important that he knew the process and was familiar with use for the things he had over their actual use. Being creative and reinventing the invention and by knowing the resources well he could unravel their best potential. It probably takes a bit of a genius as well the pressure of the situation to come up with those ideas. Otherwise you probably wouldn’t start to use your poop to plant some potatoes in a laboratory. Most times we don’t get that far, because there is simply no need for it. Why should you try to plant rice in your yard, when you can simply buy it in the store next door?

The odds of you landing on the mars and being left behind might be quite low, and yet there is a lot that this movie can teach us. Do we really steward our things that we have been given well? How can we get the best potential out of the things we have and stop complain what we don’t have? You might say that you are not creative enough to built a miraculous garden décor out of some palettes. But how about your talents, are you just good at something or do you try to improve it or develop it in a way you have never even thought about before?

What is it that is in your hands?

[thelegendarystudentbread-blog]

About arts and beauty

Arts have the tendency not be taken serious. Maybe because you would think about the boring museums where every picture seems to look the same, the artist next door that seems a little off or several wannabe Pinterest heroes on social media. What if arts and beauty is so much more than a prejudice? What is this is exactly what i is about?

• the ugly beauty

What if beauty isn’t beautiful? How we learned this week through Alexis that you can find beauty in the ugly and in the casual. So called “Wabi-Sabi” describes the ugly beauty. Not that everything is nice and beautiful, but it’s more about to renew your mindset and see beauty that you won’t be able to see at first sight. It’s about thinking out of the box and being open to see the beauty that you wouldn’t automatically associate with it. If you do so and look around you will be surprised of how much beauty is following us every single day. It might not even be the most epic sunset or the palm trees at the beach, it can start with the tiny gecko and it’s marvellous pattern and color. Even more an old book can be beautiful or a lonely old barn. Of course you have to watch out not to overdo yourself in trying to squeeze out something out of nothing. But it is at least worth a try to look at something from a different ankle.

• the art of being creative

Further being an artist is one thing. But being creative and performing art is another. Everyone is in his own sense creative and in their own profession they are practicing art. Cooking is an art, how to run a business is an art, how to teach well or sell well. Sports are for sure an art in itself and science is probably one of the most unique art professions, it is actually the one discovering arts and beauty to it’s full extent. To limit arts to a brush and a pencil would be a denial in itself. What makes art so beautiful is the uniqueness in the diversity. That somehow in all of the different forms and repeating work you still find something uniquely beautiful in it. It’s a sense of mystery and satisfying, simply oil for the heart.

• glasses of beauty

In today's society a lot of art is praised which isn’t even beautiful. And a lot of times it is not even artistic. There are several stories where it talks about the cleaning woman “cleaning” the art, because she taught it was simply dirt. This has nothing to do with her not appreciating the art, it is more about the definition of it. More, who defines art. I have been in Paris where street artist would create true masterpieces and the museum next door would show off a painting worth millions that could have been drawn by a child. In the end it is all a matter of perspective and someone's own definition of art.

But what I believe is that don’t let someone else define, what art and beauty is for you.

[thelegendarystudentbread-blog]

The art to die for

When we think about war what mostly comes into your mind is the devastating powers and cold hearted darkness it leaves behind. Who would think about beauty and art in all of the midst? Further would protect it? The movie “ The Monuments Men” (2014) addressed exactly this topic no one would think about. Based on a true story the story draws the focus to the war for art next to a world war.

• why art?

Every era and society expresses itself in various forms of culture. All of them carry the nature of art, whether it is in drama, poem, buildings, sculptures, literature, fashion or paintings. All reflect the beauty and uniqueness of the society. It tells about the history and personality of a culture. It gives people a sense of inheritance and ancestry, something that tells them where they came from in mirroring the feelings and sorrows of that time. Art is often a vessel to express what needs to be told and can’t be said. It is what makes a culture breath in it’s own unique way. And this needs to be protected like a quote in the movie underlines “You can destroy their houses and somehow they will come back. But when you destroy their achievements and history it’s like they never existed.”. So much inheritance of the culture has been destroyed by wars and left the society with a lost of identity. As well it robbed the world and the generations to come of the blessings of its beauty.

• soldiers for culture

The events took place to the end of world war, a ordinary men decided that they have to save the famous art pieces from the hands of the Nazis, which were about to the destroy them. For that they risk their life. Indeed for them they were fighting for the culture and value of history's inheritance. They were willing to give to their life for something greater and lasting, which was protecting the art to be forgotten and lost forever. Is an art piece more value than a human's life? For sure, thanks to those brave men, millions of people across the world are still able to embrace and appreciate the work drowned in passion and heart from the past. But is it the blood that was shed that gives the art value or is the art worth to shed blood for? How are we looking at those pieces? Are they stubborn survivors of peace and war in mankind? Or are they given value by people who decided that they are worth a sacrifice. I am wondering whether it was ever Leonardo da Vinci's or Picassos will that people would die for their artwork.

• the substance of culture

It all leads down to the question of what makes those pieces so special? Is it a single piece that got idolized and needs to be protected in order to “maintain” culture? Is the ‘Mona Lisa’ worth dying for? For what..? There is actually nothing special about the smiling beauty in a rational perspective. There are for sure many beautiful paintings of mysteriously smiling woman. It is all human mindset what makes the Mona Lisa so special. As well we need to ask ourselves whether it is idolizing a piece or if we are honoring the era and the arts that birthed out of it. Is it an illusion hold up by society to claim character? How much of those artworks can you actually appreciate without knowing that you should? Imagine the Mona Lisa wouldn’t be famous, painter unknown. Would you still look at it in awe and dive into its mysterious details? Is it just some names that have been hold up high or are those actually artworks worth dying for?

In the end everyone himself has to know how much art means to them. Especially because it is such a personal thing that addresses the emotions of your heart. If for those men it was worth it, it is indeed honorable.

Would you lay your life down for art?

.

[thelegendarystudentbread-blog]

Numbers

It is a topic so worn out that I hardly wage to write another text about it. This is why it shouldn’t be like any other text. This topic changed and impacted my life in a way that broke my heart forever. What makes me say it, is due to the fact that I have been at that place of hardness. “Refugees” was probably the most used word in 2015 and 2016. The news were flooded with images of hundreds of boats drowning in the Mediterranean Sea. Masses of people trying to find their ways through deserts with all they own carrying with themselves.

• when the compassion lost it’s heart..

When the so called “Refugee Crisis” started in 2015 and millions of people were streaming to Europe, people were shocked and full of compassion for the people losing their homes and life on this dangerous journey. The first reaction seemed to  be an euphoric shout for the ability to help and welcome them. This all would have been good, if there weren’t so many. When the flood just didn’t seem to stop people were starting to think bad about them. The news went from 400 people lost their life in a place that is suppose to be reserved for holidays to “another boat sunk”. The phenomenon is hard to explain, it might be a natural response to a tragic and injustice in the world that seems so far away and hard to grasp for a western mindset. Because of the amount of injustice and cruelness it is hard to relate, as well the amount that it happens seems to normalize it. Although this happened to millions, it doesn’t mean it is normal and less cruel. And although it seems so hard to relate we forget that we were never meant to understand it.

• the strangers next door

When refugee homes were common in every town and Syrians, Nigerians, Gambians and so on were seen everywhere you went. People start to think bad about them. Although there are a ton of people who sacrificed and invested a lot to help them build a future, which I am indescribably thankful for, it seemed that the common population started realizing that those “needy” don't look “needy”. Smartphones, well dressed and disrespectful behavior of the youth, brought too many people to a place of anger and spite. Then there was that thing called “jealousy”, the feeling and fear of missing out as well the dismiss of expected gratefulness on side if the refugees. But no matter how they mind response, the question is all about the motivation of help and compassion. If it is nothing else but grace, than it is all for self-righteousness. And grace can’t be earned, it is not in its nature, therefore there is no “deserving” response to grace. Of course there were too many events like rape, murder or sexual harassment that made it hard to welcome. Which I can tell on behalf of personal experience. Still I believe that those are individual persons and not to be confused with the majority.

• when the number got a face

In all the midst of numbers flooding to Europe as well drowning or dying in the desert it makes it hard to still feel compassion. On top of that all the bad experiences and questions about an upper limit for refugees coming into the countries. What make my heart break was a face, a name, a story and a person with value behind it. More, it has been several humans, that I had the chance to get to know them and being able to call them my friends. Suddenly all these numbers seemed to fall apart and broke down to one face. They became so incredibly personal, that it took my breath away. And this is how we should see every of those guys pouring into our countries. They are somebody's son or daughter, a friend. People with dreams, fears, hopes, talented and most wounds.

• only human..

Hearing about young guys being violent in refugee homes and flats made me angry first. But again, those guys lost their homes, left their families, all alone in a strange countries. They have seen more deaths than the majority of the elderly population, almost all have been harassed in slavery, beaten countless times and yet received no treatment, rejected in a country that is so strange and yet the only hope that made them step on a boat that was overload squeezed together with the guarantee of drowning. Those young guys are highly traumatized. They have seen and experienced more than anyone should have even heard about in their age. An endless hoping to be able to start anew life in a country they are looked down at. And all that we claim is to judge, whether they are acting deserving according to our great generosity or not.

What comes into play is the blame-game. Is there nothing more we have to say? What we can do is understanding that we can’t understand. We can’t and we don’t have to understand them and what they’ve been through. But we can accepted them, counsel and love on them with an honest heart. As well starting to see those numbers as humans with a personality.

And being simply a friend.

Pic.Source: cnn.com