Welcome to Gaia! ::

No, this is not an environmentalist thread. This thread is about society and philosophy. It is about communism and capitalism. It is about objectivism and morality. Please read the whole first post.

The Canadian band Rush wrote a song. This song is called The Trees. Like many of Rush's songs, it is highly philisophical and metaphorical. Here are the lyrics:

There is unrest in the forest,
There is trouble with the trees,
For the maples want more sunlight
And the oaks ignore their pleas.

The trouble with the maples,
(And they're quite convinced they're right)
They say the oaks are just too lofty
And they grab up all the light.
But the oaks can't help their feelings
If they like the way they're made.
And they wonder why the maples
Can't be happy in their shade?

There is trouble in the Forest
And the creatures all have fled
As the Maples scream 'Oppression!'
And the Oaks, just shake their heads


I will stop here to point out the purpose of this thread. What do you think "The Trees" should do? What should "The Maples" do? On one hand, many might think that "The Maples" could try really hard to gather enough nutrients to grow to the height of "The Oaks" and thus not have to complain. On the other hand, they could do what Rush had them do at the end of the song:


So the maples formed a union
And demanded equal rights.
'These oaks are just too greedy;
We will make them give us light!'
Now there's no more oak oppression,
For they passed a noble law,
And the trees are all kept equal
By hatchet,
Axe,
And saw.


Obviously, this shows that "The Trees" took the path of communism. But what of capitalism? Is it perfect? No matter how hard a maple tries, it cannot grow to be as tall as an oak. It is biologically impossible. It's the way the maple was born. An oak is born into an easy life, because its ancestors evolved into tall, powerful trees. The maples did not. A maple has no choice over how much sunlight it has, because its ancestors were not as fortunate as the oak's. So who was right? The "oaks", the "maples", or neither?

EDIT: It is also worth mentioning that Rush was a Canadian band, and many have speculated that it is no coincidence that they used maple trees (the national tree of Canada) and oaks (the national tree of both U.S. and England) in the song.

Those were some awesome lyrics. I love those types of metaphors. Personification too.
On topic, though.
You see the trees needed a 3rd party to resolve their problems. Ultimately humans with their tools. I'm not sure what else to say except, the maples could have moved? But if they wanted to stay there and try to control the Oaks, they should have formed a democracy in which each tree can brainstorm for a greater good. However, you will always get disagreeing minorities. You can't please everyone.

Personally, in my opinion they should have just left it be as it was. The government is screwed up as it is anyway. Sure its alot more easyer now then it was back when we first came here....but I think back then once everything was settled it was also more nice and peacful instead of stupid and loud. So, because of government and such things the world its self for humans have become this crapy little thing called a city or capital and people wonder around all day trying to get to a job that pays MONEY and money leads to greed and then that greed leads to rulership which turns everyone into demons. There is a reason why the native americans stayed in their reservations but that might go out of context. Anyways.....personally the trees should have just delt with the problem instead of arguing of who got more light then the others did. In my opinion there is no "law" persay because all it is is just a stupid peice of paper with a sig that means absolutly nothing to people like me. However, people like my self obey that because we are down to earth people and dont like to shake up trouble. It may seem like the government thing was a good idea but I really dont think so because of all the trouble its caused already. Anyways....that was probley out of context to but I donno my thoughts just kinda lead there for some reason.

So not what I said at all. I said that they just leave it be, in other words just let things be as they are instead of fighting over what is what and who has what.

Well without that light the maples would have died.

Its a new beggining for all living things on earth. Remember also that there is an end to all living things.

I dont think I would. I would die knowing it was my time just like the trees know its winter.

It maybe but then it comes to the end to where why should you care....its not like what you have here can be taken with you in the end. It is true no one can do anything alone but one must also learn to let go of what they have when it is their time to go. If you do not you remain tied to this realm even in psysical death which can cause even more problems.