Discover and share stories

of adventure, connection, and change making.

49 people think this is good


  1. {{}}
  1. {{fields.video_link.url}}

Ready to post! You’ve uploaded the maximum number of images.

Your video is ready to post!

Oops! Nice pic, but it’s just not our (file) type. Please try uploading a .jpg or .png image.

Well, this is embarrassing. Something went wrong when posting your comment. Care to try again?

That image is too large. Maximum size is 6MB.

Please enter a valid URL from YouTube or Vimeo.

Embedding has been disabled for this video.


Posting comment...

  • BlueCollarCritic

    We are NOT interdependent! If we were then disconnected tribes in faraway lands of ancient history would have not been able to survive.

    We are interconnected but that’s not the same as interdependent. Interdependent says that I cannot without you. I cannot eat without your assistance to plant crops. I cannot live without your assistance to provide shelter. Every adult human being that is not inflicted with some real disease or aliment has the ability to survive without the assistance of others.

    The push for interdependency is a push for collectivism which is a push for forced equality which in turn requires the use of force to enforce said equality. Dependency leads to resentment which leads to hate which leads to a very bad place.

    Promote uniqueness, sovereignty and the individual; not the group!

    You may have had good intentions with your interdependence push but the idea of interdependence is rooted in collectivism which promotes the idea of the whole over the individual. This is very dangerous as it is how the evil come to power over the rest of us. The only way to ensure people are protected from others mistakes is understand that while we are interconnected we are not interdependent.

  • Joshua Terry

    I have long been of the belief that American citizens should not have the automatic "Right" to vote. Before your ire bubbles up at this statement, hear me out! I believe that all Americans regardless of even age should be allowed to meet a single requirement in order to obtain their voting "Right" for an election. What requirement? A short test, covering the position itself and the stance of the candidates who are running.

    Seem drastic? Perhaps, but elections today are run more like popularity contests. The average voter knows more about this seasons American Idol contestants than any of the people running for office. I have long held that the "Right" to vote is not a right at all but instead, a responsibility and a privilege. People have the individual right to be uniformed, but when that right affects a larger group it actually infringes on freedom rather than supporting it.

    Consider the following scenario for a moment. You, your spouse, and 4 children are hungry. To maintain fairness meals are voted on. As parents you represent the informed minority, your children represent the uninformed majority. Why don't we do things this way? Because every meal would be McDonalds! Why? Because the majority is uninformed and thus incapable of making informed decisions.

    I believe the statement "Majority Rule" should be revised to "Informed Majority Rule". I would rather count the vote of a 15 year old who understands the issues on which he is voting, than the average person that pulls a handle simply to fit a designated label (Democrat or Republican). Americans should have the right to remain uninformed, but that privilege should come at the cost losing the right to lead.

    Just my two cents, but I'm open to opposing views if you have them.

    • BlueCollarCritic

      “I have long held that the "Right" to vote is not a right at all but instead, a responsibility and a privilege. People have the individual right to be uniformed, but when that right affects a larger group it actually infringes on freedom rather than supporting it.” ~ @Joshua

      I understand your frustration and desire to limit the important act of voting to only those person who treat it seriously but the problem with any kind of test is it opens the door for voting restrictions and that in turn opens the door for future voter discrimination based on lesser ideals.

      Incremental-ism is the weapon of choice of tyrants and dictators because it allows one to do just about anything so long as you’re willing to wait for it and to get there via small steps. If a test were a required part of voting it would be just the first step of many down a path to where only those person with inside connections and power/money are lowed to vote. The founding fathers never dreamed of an America were persons of voting age would not take the act of voting seriously. They fought and died to secure freedom and the right to elect their representatives. To the people of that time and era the idea of a citizen voting for someone based on some meaningless reason is as foreign to them as the idea of using an out-house is to us today.

      Instead of requiring one to pass a test to vote, require that all who run for political office must sign a pledge/promise which outlines what they will and will not od and in that pledge they agree to voluntarily vacate their post before their term is up if the fail to live up to their promises. Instead of putting the burden on the voter place it instead on the person seeking the seat of power.

      You are however wrong about voting being a responsibility and a privilege.

  • Jeff Nelder

    Interdependence is one step along the way to unity. Realization of unity is the only way to achieve peace and balance. Great stuff.

  • Vast Shadow

    That`s just great...

    The internet was first intended to be a database and instant-library, type infrastructure. Intended to give everyone instant access to documentation and catalogs of info from all around the world. After CompuServ, AOL, Time Warner went beyond a inner-mainframe network of just having shared documents to look at... They expanded the ability to broadcast online and that made the internet something unseen at first... A social place. People all around the world shared and engaged in opinions.

    The first chat room... Was just a webpage, that you would refresh periodically and wait for someone else to respond. Later relay chat came to be.

    The internet is now really a social engagement that is tried to have global interactions. It is always great to see group striving to fortify that.

    Some groups... Like to promote conspiracies, try to deface history, make little clubs demoting everyone else to being "sheeple" or not worthy of their little club, and you have the ever-so-popular data harvesting to market data and steal ideas on the net today.

    That is very neat little organization, y'all have I really hope it works out well.
    The internet is a very limitless possibility and it always thrives better when people are making the web... WORLD WIDE WEB.

    I always thought it would be cool if a charity would not only set donations... But actually show what the donations would build. For example -- Have a homeless shelter as the outcome of so-many donations... People could then go see that homeless shelter that they put effort for. People are looking for more effort today, charities are pretty dim even for Salvation Army... Mainly for the amount of scams that are just always at your door or inbox... It would give people faith to see their actual donation, build something they could see and touch.

    Either way, good luck with that.

  • DessaDalcieDaryn

    I think it's awesome that you're doing this for non-profits. My mom works for a non-profit that provides childcare at a low cost to parents in our state. I think non-profits actually do make a difference. It's so weird how the internet although dangerous, can make a big difference, when it comes to politics and shifting the views of other people. Especially because most of it is writing and pictures, anyone can express their opinion.

  • Nicolás Ibieta

    Kudos for this initiative.
    Let's hope it spreads like fire in every country. It can only be GOOD.