Worldwide education of the next generation. Instilling a sense of 'one world' to them. Demonstrating understanding and compassion can exist alongside guidelines for tolerance. By reaching out to make sure none of us have neighbors who are in need of a helping hand.
2006-10-29 01:40:16
·
answer #1
·
answered by CosmicKiss 6
·
2⤊
0⤋
Every method I've seen so far that hopes to create a safer world would end up making it far less safe. I assume you are not talking about eliminating risk or risk taking but are talking about eliminating abuse, terror, and humanity's inhumanity.
The problem with your question is that you are not being explicit about what you need to make safe. Consequently you never get to the realization that if you make the world safe for one thing that it usually makes the world less safe for something else.
In other words, there are many "safes" and they are often mutually exclusive.
The argument can be made that the world is always as safe as it can possibly be right now because there is no active principle that people act on to make the world less safe from their perspective. That is sort of like saying "Only the enemy makes the world less safe."
I'm not advocating inaction or some passive attitude but it is clear that those who want to save the world are those most likely to destroy it as the world's complexity unravels under their pathetic and misguided controls.
I imagine that the best way to make the world more safe is to break down the barriers that divide us into isolated groups. Beliefs and ideologies are the two most powerful forces that divide us. Therefore the elimination of all beliefs and ideologies would do wonders in making the world more "safe". How that would be accomplished is beyond me since that idea itself takes on the.form of just another belief or ideology. That limit forces us to deal with single issues separately instead of having as grandiose a plan as, say, a Pax Americana.
2006-10-29 09:29:11
·
answer #2
·
answered by Alan Turing 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
There will always be natural disasters, and accidents. Also, your word "realistically" gives one pause. One cannot control others. We look at the "man in the mirror."
Begin with the intention to make your world a safer place. Look around wherever you go, and if there is something or somone you can help in an unsafe situation...then do so.
For instance:
Help old people carry groceries, open doors for old people and children, recycle to avoid unsafe Earth for future generations, drive carefully, repair broken things around the home and neighborhood that are potential for falling, use your car less to avoid adding pollution to the atmosphere, contribute to your local foodbank, grow a garden and give away the excess, use safe fertilizers to protect ground water, dress modestly, refuse to engage in volatile situations, learn about and appreciate other religions, cultures, belief systems, resolve to live in harmony with your fellow man, get new tires when the tread is low, take care of your health, don't sneeze in other's faces, wash your hands after using the restroom, contribute to global philanthropic causes, do not engage in unsafe sex, drive slow in a school zone, refuse to participate in road rage, etc., etc., etc.
"One drop raises the ocean." Dinotopia
2006-10-29 09:13:16
·
answer #3
·
answered by samarz 2
·
1⤊
0⤋
A drastic reshuffle in the world economy, with a more evenly distributed wealth globally. Then again, it's pretty unrealistic because it would require a complete abandonment of Man's existing 'Each His Own' philosophy.
But there is hope for this world to be a safer place to live in. Reminding our future generations of people about the negative consequences of war and violence would be quite effective in curbing potential conflicts.
2006-10-29 08:36:19
·
answer #4
·
answered by citrusy 6
·
1⤊
0⤋
Let the murderous kill the suicidal.
win-win.
I think many religious people prefer death, but can't commit suicide without damnation. It's really sad. Something should be done.
This would give murderers a job, decreasing prison populations, liberating capital from expense and from the coffers of the dead.
Instead of nations of condemned misereables, people would be happy (or else!). I don't know about safer, but it would certainly be less passive-aggressive.
2006-10-29 14:54:15
·
answer #5
·
answered by -.- 6
·
0⤊
1⤋
End conservative republican rule. Best way to do that, a smarter America
2006-10-29 08:29:58
·
answer #6
·
answered by Robert D 3
·
1⤊
1⤋
get rid of the neo cons
2006-10-29 08:28:40
·
answer #7
·
answered by Bryn L 2
·
1⤊
1⤋
It is not possible.
2006-10-29 08:38:39
·
answer #8
·
answered by sa 7
·
0⤊
2⤋