Minutus

What you are saying/suggesting is that we work like coalitions where divergent points of
view/politicals/etc come together around a very specific issue. For those coalitions to work
people need to stay very narrowly focused.

I think it a good suggestion to discuss vaccine damage in cases and success in achieving cure,
however, not sure that the political or economic conditions around them would even get addressed.
Quite the contrary, I think it would be avoided in the same way the people criticize discussing anything
political around homeopathy or health care.

My frustration is that this is akin to playing ostrich with head in the ground. Health care cannot be
separated from its institutional structure in a society. And that requires removing the blinders and allowing
belief systems to be challenged. What you suggest, to me, is wishful thinking that does not match the
reality of what we are living. It is like people who don't like discussing race and racism. The common
mantra is "why do we have to talk about it. why can't we all be nice to each other." In other words,
by not talking about it, the problem will go away and in fact that is exactly what some people do say.
They blame those who talk about the uncomfortable truths as causing the problem. They say if people
didn't talk about the problem there would be no problem Unfortunately this is like the Newspeak of the
book 1984.

t
________________________________

This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
www.avast.com

Hi Tanya, reply interspersed:
No, I am suggesting that we act like an EDUCATIONAL list, exactly what this was intended to be. Its focus is intended to be "mostly classical" homeopathy. Other topics are okay so long as they do not take over too much, and we were specifically asked by the lists's owner, as well as by ts moderator, to treat each other courteously. (I forget what exact word Ardavan used.)
They would get addressed if we, here, address them. Whether it would become a conversation, and how much the topic would be picked up, that would depend on many things. But in the past, this list has shown interest and even participation in a rather wide range of (sometimes loosely) related topics.
I'm not remembering whatever you're referring to.
Sure. Let's try it -- but I would say that "challenging" someone's belief systems can be done in many ways, and to many effects. If we do it via information, which is shared in a way that draws out the person's curiosity or commitment or passion or desire to understand, there is apt to be a great deal more success, than if it is done in a way that just says "Here's the truth -- again -- in case you're not still too stupid to get it this time."
Umm….. Because why? What would be unrealistic about sharing cases -- *as we used to do*?
I can't comment on that in the abstract.
Well I don't know, since I have never had those conversations…
But sticking to the current one, I am suggesting that:
- this is a *study* list for *homeopathy* (and related topics).
- It's not a podium, and none of us is required to agree with any of us.
- If there are topics that any of us feels will benefit us -- let's teach, present, discuss! But
- let's do it in ways that take into account the first two points above.
________________________________

This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
www.avast.com