Yippie I'm a Hippy!

Dreams

I’m a frequent and vivid dreamer and find the world of dreams a fascinating one. I often have the craziest dreams that appear to make no sense whatsoever but I do believe that our dreams contain meaning; reflecting the thoughts, feelings and experiences of our waking lives. I don’t particularly believe in ‘dream symbols’ i.e. a standard definition for things appearing in dreams. I think different things carry different meanings and associations for different people and therefore the interpretation of a person’s dream should be specific to him or her

My fascination with dreams led me to ask ‘why do we dream?’ a question that I have tried to answer below:

While we are asleep, although we are unconscious our brains are incredibly active and dreams are a result of some of this activity. Sleep is the subject of much research, and in 1968 Rechtschaffen and Kales published ‘The Manual of Standardized Terminology, Techniques and Scoring System for Sleep Stages of Human Subjects’ in which they established that sleep consists of a number of repeated stages that can be broadly classified into two groups; REM (rapid eye movement) sleep and NREM (non rapid eye movement) sleep. REM sleep is when the majority of dreams appear to take place though they can also occur at other times such as when you are falling asleep or beginning to wake-up.

It has been reported that if a person's sleep is disrupted during REM they will spend more time in REM the following night. This suggests that REM sleep and dreaming, are essential for wellbeing.

For more information on the science and psychology of dreaming (including dream ‘interpretations’) please visit:

For more information on dreams and their meanings visit:
www.rtmagazine.com/issues/articles/2003-06_03.asp
www.psychwww.com/books/interp/toc.htm
www.lifetreks.com
www.dreamdoctor.com

Equality

Whether directly, or indirectly, all countries have a class system, and although many of these class systems are not as strong or evident as they used to be, it is obvious that we still judge people by their situation in life.

Many people believe that the class system is based purely on the wealth of a person, however this is evidently not true. A great believer in equality between all people was George Bernard Shaw, the writer of the play 'Pygmalion'. 'Pygmalion in itself is a play which explores the inadequacies of the English class system as it was in 1912. One character, Alfred Doolittle, suddenly finds himself in possession of a large fortune, and because of this he feels that he has been thrown into the middle class. However, Alfred Doolittle had neither the behaviour or the speech required of a middle class gentleman, and thus finds himself stuck between the working and the middle class. The fact, that because of his poor speech and behaviour, he is under-qualified to be accepted as a middle class gentleman shows that class is not based purely on wealth as we had supposed, but is more importantly based on our appearances, behaviour and speech. Should this be so? Why should people be judged purely by their appearance? A man could be dressed in rags, speak English like a badly taught foreigner, and behave appallingly, but this would not necessarily mean that he is a bad person. Whereas an elegantly dressed, well-spoken, perfectly mannered man could in fact be an awful person, plotting to kill us all! What I am trying to say is that we should not instantly judge people by the way they appear to us, because after we get to know them they may appear to be a very different person. However, if we did not immediately judge someone, how would we know how to treat him or her? Therefore I propose that we should treat everyone equally, then we could not possibly treat him or her in the wrong manner.

I think that we should not only treat people equally, we should see people as equals. This is hard to do with the current class systems, which most people would say 'keeps us in our place'. What is 'our place'? People cannot always chose the class which they belong to, it isn't their fault if they are born into working class, so why should they be treated badly because of it? People shouldn't be limited by their birth, environment or even their speech, after all it is not their outward appearance which matters, but the person they are inside, therefore everyone should be equal. I think that social organisation should depend upon equality.

It is all very well for me to talk about this equality, but it will not work if people are not willing to try. People who are well positioned in the class system are unlikely to want to change. At the moment, the upper and middle class people are respected and generally lead a more comfortable lifestyle than the working class. Therefore they may not want to be thought of as equal to the working class, as they may feel that this demeans them. If they think this way, they should try putting themselves in the position of the lower class people. This should allow them to see the benefits of an equal society. It will mean that people will have equal rights and an equal status in life, which should allow people to get on better and have a less prejudiced view of each other.

If people tried living in an equal society they would be facing one of the most important problems caused by the class system. I think that too many people turn a blind eye to unpleasant things, I often find myself doing this, however, as unpleasant as this topic is, it is one which needs to be faced.

Who am I?

Hi, my name is Laura; I’m 23 and live in South-East England. I started this website when I was 14 years old and it has grown and changed with me ever since.

I consider myself to be a hippy and most people I know (and some that I don’t) would agree. I remember when I was aged about 9 or 10 someone calling me a hippy (at the time I had long blond hair and I frequently wore a long purple and blue tie-dyed skirt that I absolutely loved) and I asked ‘what’s that?’ I don’t remember what response I got but I know that I developed a sense that a hippy is anyone who has a great belief in peace; that it can and should be reality. This is something I’ve always believed.

Some people believe that a hippy is someone who takes drugs, or someone in scruffy (often smelly) clothes that likes to go around protesting against any ‘bad’ issue they can sink their claws into. I disagree with this, although it is true that many people that fit this description would probably delight in being called a hippy.

I’m not saying that hippies do not take drugs, wear scruffy clothes (or even smelly ones if they so choose!), or protest about the things that are wrong in the world. All I’m saying is that there is much more to being a hippy than this stereotype.

I feel that a hippy is someone that tries to view people and things without prejudice, who can separate right from wrong and hopefully try to do something positive about it. I think we shouldn’t just criticize the bad but champion the good, and try and find ways to solve problems like climate change and world poverty rather than condemn them as being ‘impossible’ and ‘too late’ to deal with. I feel that a hippy is someone who strives to do good in the world and to teach other people to do the same. I know many people would mock this opinion, but why be so negative? What is wrong with trying to change the world and make it a better place for everyone; for us, our friends, our families, and for people the world over?

What’s the point in being negative and putting everything down when it’s so much more fun to challenge people’s views and improve the world we live in? Show people love, respect, freedom, and most of all – PEACE!

If you would like to add to this, or would like to submit your own definition of hippy, please e-mail me at laura@yippee-hippy.co.uk or you could put your comments on the yippee-hippy forum

Nuclear Warfare

Nuclear warfare is a very real problem and one which certainly calls for discussion. The 20^th century brought two World wars, causing massive death and destruction to many countries. We used to fight war with soldiers, now due to the aid of technology - today's weapons - we fight war with civilians, dropping bombs on the innocent victims of horrific wars. The Second World War caused the death of 15,600,00 soldiers and 39,200,000 civilians. Not only is war damaging to the worlds people, its damaging to the world's economy, its land, and all its other creatures, yet still, with all this destruction, it continues.

An eye for an eye and the world will soon be blind (Mahatma Ghandi)

In the 1940's a new, incredibly powerful and dangerous weapon was produced, the A-bomb. This atomic Bomb could cause mass destruction, not just in the initial explosion, but as a nuclear weapon it could cause terrible destruction to the people who meet with the bomb's fatal radiation. The first A-bomb to be used was in Hiroshima, 1945. The incident at the time shocked the world, and continues to shock the world's people to this very day.

Since the Hiroshima incident (and Nagasaki, which soon followed) an even more powerful and destructive weapon has been produced, the H-bomb which is thousands of times more powerful than the A-bomb dropped on Hiroshima. Since the production of such weapons there has been the constant threat of these weapons being used, a good example of this is the Cuban Missile Crisis, when both the USA and USSR had nuclear missiles pointing at each other - each threatening to release them. The theory was that this balance of power made nuclear war unlikely. The fact that both sides could destroy each other was seen as a war deterrent. This opinion of the nuclear bomb being a deterrent of war is common, and although it has remained true until now, there have been many threats of nuclear attacks since the Cuban Missile Crisis. The only thing which we must make sure of, is that nuclear attacks never become more than a threat.

On the assumption that a Third World War must escalate to nuclear destruction, I can tell you that the Fourth World War will be fought with bows and arrows (Albert Einstein)

Mushroom cloud from a nuclear explosion

If a Nuclear War were to break out the smoke from the explosions would block out so much of the sun's light that temperatures would drop dramatically to below zero. This would cause the death of about 60% of the world's population due to starvation, as crops would struggle to grow in this new dark and cold environment. People would not only die due to the devastating effects of a Nuclear Winter, they would also slowly become ill and die from the fatal effects of the radiation released from the nuclear bombs. Also embryos in their mothers' wombs would be affected by this radiation, if the effects hadn't killed them already they would most likely be born deformed (as happened to many babies born after the Hiroshima bombing). So far I have mentioned only the effects the aftermath of a nuclear war would have on the human population of the world, but what about all the thousands of other species living on this planet, what would it do to them? The devastating effects of a nuclear attack have been the inspiration for many of Simon and Garfunkel's songs, 'The Sound Of Silence', 'The Sun Is Burning' and 'Last Night I Had The Strangest Dream' to name a few.

Now the sun has come to earth, shrouded in a mushroom could of death. Death comes in a blinding flash, of hellish heat and leaves a smear of ash, and the sun has come to earth. Now the sun has disappeared, all is darkness anger pain and fear, twisted sightless wrecks of men, go groping on their knees and cry in pain, and the sun has disappeared

A reinforced-concrete building near ground zero in Hiroshima

A Hiroshima woman suffering from flashburns. The woman died on October 15, 1945.

This passage from Simon and Garfunkel's 'The Sun Is Burning' creates a picture in your mind; a scene of devastation after a Nuclear Bomb has been dropped. This image itself should be powerful enough to deter us from the creation of Nuclear weapons, yet sadly their creation still goes on. Nuclear bombs are said to be a deterrent for a nuclear war, and so far this seems to be true, but what if something went wrong, and the threat became reality? I can't see why we need nuclear weapons to stop us from using them, surely the very idea of them can do that? Picture two boys in a playground, both with fists raised, what's to stop one from throwing a punch? That's all that needs to happen, one slip and the whole world is in chaos, there have been wars on this planet for hundreds of years, why not give ourselves a break for once, stop making things worse, get rid of these horrific weapons which can only cause pain and destruction and start to work towards a better world.