6 December 2011
Radical Couch Potato. The concept of being radical conjoins up images of out of control extremists seeking to institute drastic change and forcing it upon everyone. The thought of doing nothing also has radical implications. Dose placing the extremist next to the couch potato present an easy contrast to examine or do they share more in common than we would anticipate? It’s hard to determine which course, action or lack of action, is the scariest. The wearing blinders approach is a contributing factor to many social problems that we all face. Our acceptance of these views makes us equal to the ones presenting them. We witness the viewpoints of radicals every day in the news media. They draw the major attention and focus due to the fact they prey upon the emotions and fears of ordinary people. Groups and individuals expressing extreme beliefs sometimes seek a response that may be violent, and that scares us most of the time. That’s why being bystanders produces no action or outcome, which is considered radical, unlike the activist who displays their agenda openly. The media allows these far reaching actions and ideas to consume our narrow view of our world. By taking little or no action against the militants who seek to control the destiny of the majority we become the militant through our inaction. The political process produces differing opinions, which many are considered deep-rooted in their parties. The extreme right verse the extreme left presents ideas that result in no positive action but only festers an environment of disagreement and lack of action.

An example of this is the inability to come to an agreement on our economic crises resulting in a major blow to struggling 401K retirement plans. This lack of action is leaving many no option but to work far past the current retirement age. The acceptance of pervasive views and the lack of political involvement has let our government basically run out of control. Demonstrating openly, as portrayed by the current Occupy Wall Street movement along with a hands off complacent attitude, results in lack of action preventing common sense ideas from becoming the pathway for correcting our political process. Environmental terrorists are a small group with an extreme agenda. They are willing to destroy in the name of environmental salvation. An example of this is the burning of the Two Elks Lodge at the Vail ski resort. Were they that naive to think the resort wasn’t going to rebuild the lodge? Resources were used twice to build the same building. The same is true of the numerous lawsuits the US Forest Service is involved in brought about by extreme land conservation groups. These suits consume between twenty and thirty five percent of the operating budge of the forest service. These funds should be used for land management and not for the special interest of less than one tenth of one percent of the voting public. Lack of response to these groups also represents a radical view of the do nothing general public. Letting such a few dictate the direction of the forest service is an extreme response by those who do nothing but complain when access to their favorite national park is shut off. Religionist groups who let people die from starvation and poor medical services support radical views. An extreme muslin military faction in Somalia is allowing four

million people to starve in order to keep outside influences from diminishing their control of the country. Can any religion support this type of radical thought process? Our lack of action is our acceptance of this radical view thus making us the extremist. Isn’t the world guilty of sitting back and allowing this to happen, thus supporting a radical situation? Watching far-reaching actions and philosophies mature without a response, acknowledges our acceptance of these schemes and presents us as radicals. With very little effort we all can make a difference in how these extreme groups are dealt with. Taking the time to vote and attend a political function expresses a concern about our political process and keeps radical views in check. The only way our government will institute change is by public outcry. This may only require a few hours of our time. The Internet is a great way to keep abreast of the issues the U S Forest service is dealing with. District rangers are required to have open meetings so the public can express views and be part of the management plans being developed by each district. Making an effort to attend meeting and present a different viewpoint will help establish new approaches to our land use issues. Helping out at a local food bank or soup kitchen is a great way to for families to get involved with the needs of the local community. Letting our legislatures know through phone calls and emails that four million people starving is not acceptable. We need to take action to resolve these problems and not let a few religious zealots control the destiny of these starving people. If everyone gives just a little, maybe one or two hours a week, the results will be far reaching. Letting radical actions take place and being a bystander sends the message that we agree with these concepts which makes us the radical. Lets set us apart, make our actions have meaning, and reduce the impact of radicals in our society.