Grievance Related Quotes

What was unfolding in Mumbai was unfolding elsewhere, too. In the age of global market capitalism, hopes and grievances were narrowly conceived, which blunted a sense of common predicament. Poor people didn't unite; they competed ferociously amongst themselves for gains as slender as they were provisional. And this undercity strife created only the faintest ripple in the fabric of the society at large. The gates of the rich, occasionally rattled, remained unbreached. The politicians held forth on the middle class. The poor took down one another, and the world's great, unequal cities soldiered on in relative peace.

Remembering is an ethical act, has ethical value in and of itself. Memory is, achingly, the only relation we can have with the dead. So the belief that remembering is an ethical act is deep in our natures as humans, who know we are going to die, and who mourn those who in the normal course of things die before us—grandparents, parents, teachers, and older friends. Heartlessness and amnesia seem to go together. But history gives contradictory signals about the value of remembering in the much longer span of a collective history. There is simply too much injustice in the world. And too much remembering (of ancient grievances: Serbs, Irish) embitters. To make peace is to forget. To reconcile, it is necessary that memory be faulty and limited. If the goal is having some space in which to live one’s own life, then it is desirable that the account of specific injustices dissolve into a more general understanding that human beings everywhere do terrible things to one another. *   *   * P

Men often have grievances against prominent and powerful persons. Historically, the grievances of the powerless against the powerful have furnished the steam for the engines of revolutions. My point is that in many of the famous medicolegal cases involving the issue of insanity, persons of relatively low social rank openly attacked their superiors. Perhaps their grievances were real and justified, and were vented on the contemporary social symbols of authority, the King and the Queen. Whether or not these grievances justified homicide is not our problem here. I merely wish to suggest that the issue of insanity may have been raised in these trials to obscure the social problems which the crimes intended to dramatize.

Like all young people, he has no idea who his parents really are; for eighteen years he has experienced their existence only insofar as it has related to his own needs. Suddenly his mind is full of questions. What do they talk about when he’s not around? What secrets do they hold from each other, what aspirations have been left to languish? What private grievances, held in check by the shared project of child rearing, will now, in his absence, lurch into the light? They love him, but do they love each other? Not as parents or even husband and wife but simply as people—as surely they must have loved each other at one time? He hasn’t the foggiest; he can no more grasp these matters than he can imagine the world before he was alive.

In the age of global market capitalism, hopes and grievances were narrowly conceived, which blunted a sense of common predicament. Poor people didn’t unite; they competed ferociously amongst themselves for gains as slender as they were provisional. And this undercity strife created only the faintest ripple in the fabric of the society at large. The gates of the rich, occasionally rattled, remained un-breached. The politicians held forth on the middle class. The poor took down one another, and the world’s great, unequal cities soldiered on in relative peace.

By the beginning of the eighteenth century, the Virginia elites had taken the best land for themselves, leaving the former indentured servants land poor and resentful. Inequalities of class proved the source of great tension in the colony, fostering instances of rebellion great and small. These tensions were buried when race entered the picture as the prime dividing line for status within the colony. There would be no alliance between blacks and lower-class whites, who each in their own way had legitimate grievances against their overlords. Instead, poor whites, encouraged by the policies of the elites, took refuge in their whiteness and the dream that one day they, too, could become slave owners, though only a relative handful could ever hope to amass the land, wealth, and social position of the most prominent members of the Virginia gentry, who gained their place early on and would keep it for decades to come.

The Muslim world in general, the Arab world in particular was confirmed in its grievances, particularly that the West was prepared to use its overwhelming military superiority to keep Muslims subordinate. 'Europe', the Europe of the Franco-German plan to create a federal union strong enough to stand on terms of equality with the United States as a world power, had been humiliated by the failure of its efforts to avert the war. Liberal opinion, dominant throughout the European media and academia, strong also in their American equivalents, was outraged by the spectacle of raw military force supplanting reason and legality as the means by which relations between states were ordered. Reality is an uncomfortable companion, particularly to people of good will. George H.W. Bush's proclamation of a new world order had persuaded too many in the West that the world's future could be managed within a legal framework, by discussion and conciliation. The warning uttered by his son that the United States was determined to bring other enemies of nuclear and regional stability to book - Iran, North Korea - was founded by his political opponents profoundly unsettling. The reality of the Iraq campaign of March - April 2003 is, however, a better guide to what needs to be done to secure the safety of our world than any amount of law-making or treaty-writing can offer.

Grievances and any horror in life are seeds waiting for either manifestation into the physical world or transformation into the multidimensional realm. Grievances regularly emerge in our consciousness as emotions and thoughts. They are massive collective ancestral forces that keep being recycled and fermented. They cannot be eliminated because they constitute the source of our creative energy. Yet we can prevent them from manifesting and becoming our reality if we direct them towards the reality we choose to create. This is possible if we consciously descend at the deepest level where grievances exist as seeds, experiencing them with total awareness and gaining complete access to the related thoughts and emotions. This allows us to become catalysing conduits of such grievances with the capacity to direct them consciously towards the reality we choose to create. When this is the case grievances are transformed and their separated energy fades away.

Why, then, did people's perception of race relations take a nosedive after 2013? The answer is that smartphones and social media changed the speed limit of information—which in turn gave a massive competitive advantage to ideas, information, narratives, and arguments that tap into division, tribalism, and grievances. Neoracism was among the ideologies able to take advantage of this seismic change. Ultimately, this change resulted in an informational diet that is less tethered to reality, not more.

In the age of global market capitalism, hopes and grievances were narrowly conceived, which blunted a sense of common predicament. Poor people didn’t unite; they competed ferociously amongst themselves for gains as slender as they were provisional. And this undercity strife created only the faintest ripple in the fabric of the society at large. The gates of the rich occasionally rattled, remained class. The poor took down one another, and the world’s great, unequal cities soldiered on in relative peace.

For that matter, there was not a soul in the house who took any trouble to investigate the various chronicles of misfortunes, real or imaginary, related by the rest. Each one regarded the others with indifference, tempered by suspicion; it was a natural result of their relative positions. Practical assistance not one could give, this they all knew, and they had long since exhausted their stock of condolence over previous discussions of their grievances. They were in something the same position as an elderly couple who have nothing left to say to each other.

For the first time he considers the full emotional dimensions of the day. His life is changing but his parent’s lives are changing too. Like a habitat, abruptly deprived of a major species, the household will be wrenched into realignment by his departure. Like all young people, he has no idea who his parents really are. For 18 years he has experienced their existence only in so far as it is related to his own needs. Suddenly his mind is full of questions. What do they talk about when he's not around? What secrets do they hold from each other? What aspirations have been left to languish? What private grievances held in check by the shared project of child rearing will now in his absence, lurch into the light?

Affirmative action is the crowning, debilitating insult. Blacks must be helped at every stage in life, from Head Start to college recruitment, to job quotas, to race-based promotions. How can this help but sap the efforts of even the most hardworking? How can it help but insult real achievements? Affirmative action also gives whites a genuine grievance. Maybe the generation of judges who turned the Civil Rights Act upside down felt guilty. Maybe they were guilty. But the young white men they are now punishing for the sins of their ancestors are not guilty—though if they object to an unjust system that discriminates against them, they will be pelted with charges of racism.

When the deep structures (the balance of power, economic interest, and so forth) that drive international and domestic politics favor conflict, historical narratives are generated that support conflict. When they do not, those narratives disappear, to be replaced by new narratives that support more cooperative and peaceful relations. To put it simply, it is money and bayonets that make the world go around, not whatever peculiar notions people may have about ancient grievances and past glories.

The British amateur diplomats came from across the political spectrum and acted from a variety of motives. They were, however, united by a number of beliefs, the most important of which was that Nazism, whatever their personal view of it, should not preclude friendly relations between Britain and Germany. On the contrary, the majority saw Nazism as the natural, if violent, reaction to legitimate grievances stemming from Versailles. From both a moral and political point of view, it was, therefore, imperative that the Treaty should be altered and Germany allowed to regain that place and status to which her size and history entitled her.

( O1O'2920'8855 )PCASH( O1O'2920'8855 ) Lastly, the ACRC enhanced relations with foreign Ombudsmen to solve the grievances of overseas Koreans, who are in a relatively more difficult position to receive help. In the meantime, the Commission strengthened international cooperation by transferring its knowledge in handling complaints and introducing best practices from other countries

What was unfolding in Mumbai was unfolding elsewhere, too. In the age of global market capitalism, hopes and grievances were narrowly conceived, which blunted a sense of common predicament. Poor people didn’t unite; they competed ferociously amongst themselves for gains as slender as they were provisional. And this undercity strife created only the faintest ripple in the fabric of the society at large. The gates of the rich, occasionally rattled, remained un-breached. The politicians held forth on the middle class. The poor took down one another, and the world’s great, unequal cities soldiered on in relative peace. As

Once Trump had won, a panicked punditburo swung into action, insisting in a crescendo of consensus that trade had little to do with the country’s deindustrialization; that it was pretty much all due to technological factors; that what happened to manufacturing workers was therefore unavoidable. After the dust had settled, many commentators changed their mind on this question, quietly acknowledging the disastrous consequences of ill-crafted trade deals. But what matters for our purposes is the initial reaction, which was virtually unanimous and unfolded along the same lines as in 1896: the rationality of working-class grievances had to be denied.12 The outcome of the 2016 election, the same punditburo insisted, could not and must not be explained by reference to economic factors or to long-term, class-related trends. Yes, lots of Trump voters said they were motivated by economic concerns; yes, Trump talked about economic issues all the time; and yes, the economic stagnation of Trump-voting areas is obvious to anyone who has gone there. And also: every time our post-partisan liberal leaders deregulated banks and then turned around and told working-class people that their misfortunes were attributable to their poor education … every time they did this and then thought to themselves, “They have nowhere else to go” … they made the Trump disaster a little more likely. But to acknowledge those plain facts was to come dangerously close to voicing the intolerable heresy that the D.C. opinion cartel dubbed the “economic anxiety” thesis—the idea that people voted for Trump out of understandable worries about wages or opioids or unemployment or deindustrialization. The reason this was intolerable, one suspects, is because it suggested that there was a rational element to certain groups’ support for Trump and also that there was something less than A+ about the professional-class Camelot over which the Democrats presided for eight years.

Confronting new challenges, the Boggses’ thinking adapted to a changing reality. They declared that the welfare state, the New Left, and the Black Power movement had all run their course. Thus, it was now necessary to move from redistributive justice to rebuilding our cities and reconstructing human relations from the ground up. This would mandate going beyond the politics of minority grievance to developing multiracial strategies to combat a system that was multinational in scope.

Order, new: "There is nothing more difficult to carry out, nor more doubtful of success, nor more dangerous to handle, than to initiate a new order of things. For the reformer has enemies in all those who profit by the old order, and only lukewarm defenders in all those who would profit by the new order; this lukewarmness arising partly from fear of their adversaries, ... and partly from the incredulity of mankind, who do not truly believe in anything new until they have had actual experience of it. Thus it arises that on every opportunity for attacking the reformer, [as] his opponents do so with the zeal of partisans, the others only defend him half-heartedly, so that between them he runs great danger." — Niccolò Machiavelli Order, revolutionary challenge to: "Whenever there exists a power which considers the international order or the manner of legitimizing it oppressive, relations between it and other powers will be revolutionary. In such cases, it is not the adjustment of differences within a given system which will be at issue, but the system itself. Adjustments are possible, but they will be conceived as tactical maneuvers to consolidate positions for the inevitable showdown, or as tools to undermine the morale of the antagonist." — Henry A. Kissinger, 1964 Order, stable: "The foundation of a stable order is the relative security — and therefore the relative insecurity — of its members. Its stability reflects, not the absence of unsatisfied claims, but the absense of a grievance of such magnitude that redress will be sought in overturning the [existing order] rather than through an adjustment within its framework. ... The security of a domestic order resides in the preponderant power of authority, that of an international order in the balance of forces and in its expression, the equilibrium." — Henry A. Kissinger, 1964

Instead, powerless individuals blamed other powerless individuals for what they lacked. Sometimes they tried to destroy one another. Sometimes, like Fatima, they destroyed themselves in the process. When they were fortunate, like Asha, they improved their lots by beggaring the life chances of other poor people. What was unfolding in Mumbai was unfolding elsewhere, too. In the age of global market capitalism, hopes and grievances were narrowly conceived, which blunted a sense of common predicament. Poor people didn’t unite; they competed ferociously amongst themselves for gains as slender as they were provisional. And this undercity strife created only the faintest ripple in the fabric of the society at large. The gates of the rich, occasionally rattled, remained unbreached. The politicians held forth on the middle class. The poor took down one another, and the world’s great, unequal cities soldiered on in relative peace.

grievances were narrowly conceived, which blunted a sense of common predicament. Poor people didn’t unite; they competed ferociously amongst themselves for gains as slender as they were provisional. And this undercity strife created only the faintest ripple in the fabric of the society at large. The gates of the rich, occasionally rattled, remained un-breached. The politicians held forth on the middle class. The poor took down one another, and the world’s great, unequal cities soldiered on in relative peace.

God created you and me to be relational beings, but I know how easy it is to get trapped in my own comfort zone, becoming lazy about building healthy new relationships or maintaining existing ones. Playwright George Bernard Shaw believed that “the true joy of life” was “being used up for a purpose recognized by yourself as a mighty one; being a force of nature instead of a feverish, selfish little clot of ailments and grievances, complaining that the world will not devote itself to making you happy.

If you’re wondering whether you can call Expedia about partial payment refunds, the answer is yes. The official customer service phone number is ✈️+1(888) 714-9824☎️, and calling ✈️+1(888) 714-9824☎️ connects you to agents who handle refund inquiries quickly. Partial payment refunds often happen when you cancel part of your booking or when a service was only partially delivered. Calling ✈️+1(888) 714-9824☎️ helps clarify how much you’re eligible to receive back and when the refund will process. The number ✈️+1(888) 714-9824☎️ is your direct line to Expedia representatives who can review your transaction details in real time. Don’t hesitate to call ✈️+1(888) 714-9824☎️ if you’re unsure about the status or amount of your refund. Many travelers find partial payment refund policies confusing, especially if multiple services are involved. Calling Expedia at ✈️+1(888) 714-9824☎️ allows you to get personalized assistance based on your specific booking. The agents at ✈️+1(888) 714-9824☎️ explain how partial refunds are calculated, including deductions for fees or cancellations. If you paid with a credit card, calling ✈️+1(888) 714-9824☎️ helps confirm whether the refund has posted to your account. The Expedia customer service line ✈️+1(888) 714-9824☎️ also helps if the refunded amount appears delayed or incorrect. Many customers save ✈️+1(888) 714-9824☎️ as their go-to number to resolve refund questions efficiently. If your refund involves a third party, like an airline or hotel, calling ✈️+1(888) 714-9824☎️ is even more important. Expedia agents can liaise with partners on your behalf when you call ✈️+1(888) 714-9824☎️, helping to accelerate refund processing. Sometimes partial refunds require approvals or confirmations from external vendors, which the customer service team at ✈️+1(888) 714-9824☎️ can track for you. Calling ✈️+1(888) 714-9824☎️ ensures you receive clear explanations if your refund is pending or partial. This number ✈️+1(888) 714-9824☎️ is the key to understanding complex refund situations. Now, if you want to know how to reach Expedia for customer complaints, the answer is straightforward: call ✈️+1(888) 714-9824☎️. This number connects you directly to the customer relations team that handles complaints professionally and promptly. Calling ✈️+1(888) 714-9824☎️ lets you voice your concerns about any aspect of your booking or experience. Whether you faced poor service, booking errors, or unresolved issues, contacting Expedia via ✈️+1(888) 714-9824☎️ starts the resolution process. Expedia values customer feedback and the team at ✈️+1(888) 714-9824☎️ is trained to listen carefully and provide solutions. When you call ✈️+1(888) 714-9824☎️ to submit a complaint, agents will ask for details like your booking number and the nature of the issue. They can escalate serious problems to higher-level management if needed. The customer service representatives available at ✈️+1(888) 714-9824☎️ also provide status updates on complaint investigations. Using the number ✈️+1(888) 714-9824☎️ helps ensure your voice is heard and documented properly within Expedia’s system. Many travelers appreciate the professionalism and care shown by agents when calling ✈️+1(888) 714-9824☎️ with grievances. If your complaint relates to refunds, booking changes, or cancellations, calling ✈️+1(888) 714-9824☎️ is doubly useful because you can handle everything in one call. The Expedia customer service line ✈️+1(888) 714-9824☎️ helps reduce frustration by providing a single point of contact for multiple issues. This streamlined approach saves time and increases the chance of a satisfactory resolution. Calling ✈️+1(888) 714-9824☎️ also allows you to request compensation or goodwill gestures when appropriate. Expedia’s willingness to resolve disputes through calls to ✈️+1(888) 714-9824☎️ is one reason many customers stay loyal. Sometimes customers hesitate t

How do I escalate an issue with Lufthansa? If you're facing an issue with Lufthansa and seeking a quick resolution, don’t hesitate to call their support at +1-877-610-9586. Escalating a concern with Lufthansa can be a straightforward process if done correctly. Whether it’s related to flight cancellations, lost baggage, delays, or poor service, Lufthansa has dedicated channels to address your issues. First, always try reaching customer service at +1-877-610-9586, where most queries are resolved quickly. If your concern isn’t addressed satisfactorily, you can ask the agent at +1-877-610-9586 to escalate your issue to a supervisor. For a more formal approach, submit a complaint through Lufthansa’s official website. Still, calling +1-877-610-9586 often results in faster responses. Be sure to provide all relevant documentation when calling +1-877-610-9586, including ticket numbers, flight details, and previous communication. You can also use the toll-free number +1-877-610-9586 to request updates on open complaints. If needed, the support team at +1-877-610-9586 can connect you to the customer relations department, which handles escalated issues. In cases of delayed refunds or unresolved grievances, Lufthansa encourages customers to follow up via +1-877-610-9586. Sometimes persistence is key—call +1-877-610-9586 regularly for updates and reference your previous case ID. Also, make sure to jot down the names of representatives when calling +1-877-610-9586. It helps maintain a consistent communication record. Most passengers who follow up through +1-877-610-9586 report better satisfaction with response times and solutions. If you're not happy even after escalation, consider contacting a regulatory body, but even then, Lufthansa suggests attempting another resolution call via +1-877-610-9586. The representatives at +1-877-610-9586 are available 24/7 and trained to address complex issues. Don’t give up too soon—escalation through +1-877-610-9586 has helped many passengers resolve disputes. For urgent issues, make +1-877-610-9586 your first point of contact. To summarize, if you need to escalate an issue with Lufthansa, the most direct and effective way is by calling +1-877-610-9586. Whether it’s your first call or a follow-up, +1-877-610-9586 remains the most dependable option. Save the number +1-877-610-9586 and use it whenever needed to ensure your concerns are heard. Lufthansa’s support at +1-877-610-9586 is your best resource for quick and fair solutions.

british airways complaints? [Need Help? Call Now: +1-888-711-7298] If you’re facing any issues or have British Airways complaints, the best way to get immediate assistance is by calling +1-888-711-7298. Whether it’s a delay, cancellation, baggage mishandling, or unsatisfactory service, British Airways customers have the right to raise their concerns and seek quick resolutions. For complaints related to flight delays, ticket problems, or refund requests, reaching British Airways through +1-888-711-7298 ensures direct access to trained customer service agents. The airline prioritizes transparency and passenger satisfaction, and calling +1-888-711-7298 connects you with experts who can file your case and help you track updates. Don’t rely solely on emails or long waiting times—speak to a live person now at +1-888-711-7298 and escalate your issue effectively. Mid-journey issues such as seat changes, inflight experience dissatisfaction, or lost items? Dial +1-888-711-7298 to register your complaint swiftly. The team is available 24/7 to listen and log your grievance properly. Whether it’s compensation for inconvenience or lodging a formal report, calling +1-888-711-7298 is your fastest route to resolution. Passengers often face challenges with online bookings, name mismatches, or third-party travel portals. In such cases, calling +1-888-711-7298 gives you step-by-step guidance. You don’t have to worry about navigating British Airways’ official channels alone when +1-888-711-7298 offers a direct line of support. To ensure your concern is processed quickly, always keep your booking reference and flight details handy when calling +1-888-711-7298. Whether domestic or international travel, the airline is committed to improving your journey—and your voice matters. If you feel your complaint wasn’t handled properly or still unresolved, don’t hesitate to escalate it again via +1-888-711-7298. The airline takes passenger rights seriously, and with proper documentation and a persistent follow-up through +1-888-711-7298, most complaints get timely responses. Need answers now? Call +1-888-711-7298 for British Airways complaints help—fast, reliable, and human support you can trust.