Humourous definitions

Wow! What a heavy series of posts we have been through. Since it is Easter, a time of celebration, it is time for hilarious definitions about some words which have been abused by the current government:

Policy - money hand outs given to sections of the Australian community favoured by the Labor party, that is mothers who are given a baby bonus or paid maternity leave even when Labor in is a deficit.

Boats - a strange looking sea-faring vehicle that needs to be turned back immediately to another country, namely Malaysia where it will, in the view of the government, teach asylum seekers a lesson not to annoy the Australian government

Misogyny - the hatred of Labor party women and other elites, but not the hatred of Liberal party women. This is because only elite women have value by virtue of their progressiveness in women's rights. All other women are of no value because they are not supportive of the progressive agenda.

Misandry - does not exist in the view of the "handbag hit squad" (a phrase coined by Liberal MP Kelly O'Dwyer), allegedly consisting of the gang of four, namely Julia Gillard, Nicola Roxon, Tanya Plibersek and Deborah O'Neil.

Mining tax - a tax that only collected about 1% of the intended revenue to be received by the government

Welfare groups - groups that help the government win votes by demanding the government to tax the working class, but not the super rich business class like the mining magnates, by making the government look like the caring socialist government that seeks to make everyone equal

Working class - the group of people that make up majority of the population who the government secretly likes the most because they have adequate taxation capacity, but no power to stop the government from hitting them with a tax hike that may one day go up to about 70% (like France).

Communalism is not Utilitarianism

Many people in the West believe that communalism is based on a utilitarian framework. Some even  believe that a communalistic society is a mere ideal that cannot work. What is meant by 'cannot work' needs to be carefully defined.

Communalism seeks to care for the needs of the community as a whole, and that no one or no group should only be looking after their own needs. Thus, community-oriented societies such as Asian societies tend to be against individualistic pursuits of pleasure and comfort. Goals such as working to contribute to the community, instead of having a career as a status symbol, and looking after family rather than just having it all as a sign of accomplishment are worthy of pursuing.

This is in stark contrast to the West where people must have a career to show how independent one is, or where a person who is unmarried, particularly a woman who is unmarried lacks something.

Utilitarianism is the idea that worthy goals or achievements should be maximised for the greater good. This, in effect, endorses the harm caused to certain groups or individuals for the good of the public. It may seem that this is communalistic, but this is in fact, anti-communalist, because communalism is the idea that all people should be cared for because all the equal. Communalism does not endorse majority groups harming minority groups, not minority groups harming majority groups.

Survey Link

Feel free to complete survey below:

<a href="http://www.surveymonkey.com/s/WMKWPLW">Click here to take survey</a>

Just copy http://www.surveymonkey.com/s/WMKWPLW and go.

What Individualism Is

The ideology of individualism is dominant over communalism in the West. Individualism is the idea that the individual need to look after oneself before others. Looking after oneself before others means to serve oneself, rather than others. In other words, the needs of community and family are placed after the self - they are of a lower status than the self. The needs of others are not as important and do not deserve any care, unless, of course, they can benefit the self.

Individualism is selfish. Although people need to look after themselves, the needs of others need to be cared for in pursuing one's interests. I am skeptical of charities, particularly the ones that seek to help only certain group of people gain their self-interests, as opposed to helping the community as a whole, such a humanitarian groups. Such charities claim that they have to do so, in order to care for the community. I do not agree with this claim as the different sections of the communities depend on each other. 

A community is a whole body made up of different parts with different functions. It is a lie that there is no such thing as society because we all depend on others achieve our interests and obtain our needs. 

The term 'charities; has been abused, especially by interest groups that campaign for the rights of one's own groups. These groups often seek rights without responsibility. They seems to care for the whole community by claiming that groups that oppose their views and actions are oppressing them. 

It is not that focusing on helping a certain group of people is wrong. It is that it is selfish to pursue one's own rights without caring for the needs of others. 

What Communalism Is

Communalism comes from the term 'community'. It is essentially about caring for the needs of the community as a whole rather than placing a focus on the needs (or wants) of the individual. Community is society that is made up of people who are inherently dependent on each other.

Dependence, in this context means that people need other people to get what they need or want. For example, an employer provides jobs, the government needs its servants for government to function effectively. No one is independent of other like an island, that is, no man or woman is an island. Every person has talents to contribute to the community and every person has boundaries. How people use their talents and accept their boundaries is what many struggle with, especially in our modern society.

Modern values teach people that independence and self-sufficiency make one successful. There is no such thing as a self-made person because every successful person (whatever successful means) depends on others who have helped them get there. No person is ever redundant. A person made be made redundant by a company or goverment body, but no person is redundant in terms of his or her existence. That a person can become redundant as a human is a lie, so don't believe it. Don't make yourself feel you need to be independent of others, because you need others to help, just like how others need you.

Every person has a purpose in life - a purpose that involves serving others, not serving oneself.

Communalism vs Individualism: How it is viewed in the West

Many people in the liberal West cringe at the term communalism. Many become worried about the rights of valued minorities, not unvalued minorities, believing that communalism is about maximising happinness for the greater good. I argue that it is not communalism, but individualism that harms society more. Communalism is often associated with socialism and communism. This is partially true, but communalism can be understood, not only in the political sense, but the social, cultural and moral sense.

Most Asian and African cultures are communalistic. There is a strong emphasis placed on family and community values. To many in the West, this communalistic system would lead to the marginalisation of minorities. However, the marginalisation of minorities also occur in individualistic societies, if not treated worse in individualistic societies.

Gay movement: Redefining the meaning of Equality (3)

The homosexual lobby shouts louder for equality each day. It preaches to the masses about marriage equality, telling them about how they can't get married while others can. It has influenced many by instilling the generally accepted belief that homosexuality is an inherent personal characteristic.

Studies have shown that homosexuality is not switched on by a gene or sets of genes. Homosexuality is a behaviour, not a personal characteristic that a person cannot change, such as one's race, sex or age. People are not born homosexuals. Rather, they become homosexual as a result of  their experiences and social environment in which they live in.Therefore, it follows that legalising gay marriage would be like legalising paedophilia or rape on the (false) premise that a paedophilic or raping tendencies are natural and cannot be changed.