Why not?

When I heard the recent statistics on this it really just took my breath away and illustrates how far women have to go to be empowered and valued.

It concerns global warming and climate change. Others should care about it because it will be the end of the world if we don’t resolve the issue.

Life long learning challenges premises and stimulates awareness of difference, whilst negating ignorance.

*slap bass*

Most of us work because it facilitates us being paid, which affords us the ability to live. Some few people manage to pursue passions, vocations and the like. Others make different valuable contributions to society. What is necessary about working – is there a different model of enough where people can live well and contribute to a collective society without it being reduced to the *need* and *imperative* to have a job and be paid. What if there were other ways?

Where are the Christian politicians who care for humanity rather than their own personal ambitions and pension?

Adding a signature to an e-petition or sharing a post to support a cause on Facebook has become second nature to us, and they fill our news feeds. The internet and social media has made it incredibly easy to create a noise.
But does the sharing and e-signing actually make a difference? Was activism more effective in ‘simpler times’? Google something like the anti-conscription rallies in Melbourne during World War I, or the petition by women wanting the right to vote. This was activism on a scale we don’t see any more, and yet we’re more aware and there’s no shortage of people. So has social media made our activism lazier? Were we simply more bored ‘back in the day’ and staged large protests? Is social media both the best thing and the worst thing when it comes to effective activism?

It seemed the obvious question to ask and it doesn’t matter to me but I will be interested in any responses.

Questions drive inquiry, which is the way to critically engage with contested ideas.