World Politics

Page 648 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
Status
Not open for further replies.
Jan 27, 2013
1,383
0
0
rhubroma said:
I see no conflict in this with what you brought up about what I said.

That's because we mostly are in agreement. I just don't have quite the same bug a boo about religion that you seem to. There are aspects of thought (and imagination) that religion contains that I find very interesting. There has been good to come from it too, besides, we can't erase the fact that religion has been used as glue for societies historically, for better and worse. What's more disturbing is that both Christianity in NA and Islam (in Saudi for ex.) have taken on more regressive forms than probably any previous time. I wonder what was happening in the 6th century that made Islam seem to be a better alternative. I bet life on the ground, in that part of the world, was more scary prior to...but I can only imagine. Every deviant behaviour that humans have ever dreamed up (more even) carries on today regardless, in both religious and secular worlds.

I really don't like groupthink in any form. These days TV has taken over. Ugh. How many times have I heard that Russia has invaded the Ukraine lately (in casual conversation). Sigh.
 
RetroActive said:
That's because we mostly are in agreement. I just don't have quite the same bug a boo about religion that you seem to. There are aspects of thought that religion contains that I find very interesting. There has been good to come from it too, we can't erase the fact that religion has been used as glue for societies historically, for better and worse.

I really don't like groupthink in any form. These days TV has taken over. Ugh. How many times have I heard that Russia has invaded the Ukraine lately (in casual conversation). Sigh.

How about a termite? Apart from my sarcasm, what interests me isn't the spirituality that religion has undoubtedly produced, but when that spirituality becomes an alibi for murder, or repression, which has been all too often. For this reason I don't have a tabernacle to defend.

TV tells us what we want to know, and then sells it to us.

PS. As per your added commentary, I think that what often frequently gets passed off as democratic fairness, is really a veil to obscure the motives behind being able to expand markets and thus to sell something. This then gets packaged, as moral principle, in a political correctness that has neither to do with real morals, nor correctness. It certainly can't help us tackle real, and really big, problems.
 
Jan 27, 2013
1,383
0
0
rhubroma said:
How about a termite? Apart from my sarcasm, what interests me isn't the spirituality that religion has undoubtedly produced, but when that spirituality becomes an alibi for murder, or repression, which has been all too often. For this reason I don't have a tabernacle to defend.

TV tells us what we want to know, and then sells it to us.

I agree.

What do we invariably want to know? We're good, the enemy is bad.
 
So the French all agree that yesterday's demonstrations were predominantly white-skinned, much more than their cities' demography would suggest. Not even just the Paris demonstration but in Strasburg, Marseille, etc.


But what did they think, these Frogs ??? That they'd get Muslim demonstrators with them, on order? And alongside all these world leaders, on top of that!

They forced them to come with them, naturally these Arabic and Black migrants refused to join the party. It's a good thing that these populations have kept their dignity. :)
 
RetroActive said:
I really don't like groupthink in any form. These days TV has taken over. Ugh. How many times have I heard that Russia has invaded the Ukraine lately (in casual conversation). Sigh.

Groupthink is a characteristic of atheism, not of religion. Believers distrust laws of men, certainly when they contradict their moral principles. Ever seen the "Prisoner" series? Perfect example of a Christian motivated rebellion against a totalitarian and spuriously democratic regime while the population remains hedonistic and apathic. Panem & circenses.

TV has fewer and fewer viewers, now, anyway.


Actually, I start distrusting "moderate atheists" (even though that would be disowning Orwell & Pasolini but they were from another era, with a more classical education). They would openly swear they are not Islamophobic but in hindsight all they wish is to exterminate Muslims (though some would even openly claim the two, schizo!). They don't even assume what they are.

Islamophobia is not a right-wing conservative phenomenon, that's a monumental error of analysis. The Christian conservatives and monarchists have always treated Muslims with respect (see Lyautey). Islamophobia comes from the secularist Left. The same who formerly trashed the Christians but since Vatican II Christianity is almost down, so they switched to Islam (Emmanuel Todd described that very well).

Now we see that Islamophobia is really mainstream and the dominant ideology. Each and every party in each and every country in Europe are Islamophobic, from far right to far left. It might even be the only thing that they have in common. The common denominator!
 
Echoes said:
Groupthink is a characteristic of atheism, not of religion. Believers distrust laws of men, certainly when they contradict their moral principles. Ever seen the "Prisoner" series? Perfect example of a Christian motivated rebellion against a totalitarian and spuriously democratic regime while the population remains hedonistic and apathic. Panem & circenses.

TV has fewer and fewer viewers, now, anyway.


Actually, I start distrusting "moderate atheists" (even though that would be disowning Orwell & Pasolini but they were from another era, with a more classical education). They would openly swear they are not Islamophobic but in hindsight all they wish is to exterminate Muslims (though some would even openly claim the two, schizo!). They don't even assume what they are.

Islamophobia is not a right-wing conservative phenomenon, that's a monumental error of analysis. The Christian conservatives and monarchists have always treated Muslims with respect (see Lyautey). Islamophobia comes from the secularist Left. The same who formerly trashed the Christians but since Vatican II Christianity is almost down, so they switched to Islam (Emmanuel Todd described that very well).

Now we see that Islamophobia is really mainstream and the dominant ideology. Each and every party in each and every country in Europe are Islamophobic, from far right to far left. It might even be the only thing that they have in common. The common denominator!

Now that's just so absurd as to make me sigh in disbelief. When we listen to all the political pundits on TV, the ones who are most quick to claims (invariably and without failure!) that Islam is inherently violent are on the right, whereas the ones who call for a more sobber analysis, while stressing the need to not renounce the West's democratic values, are on the left. The Christian right's religious fascism, the mirror image of Islamic fascism, just without its contemporary propensity for acts of terrorism (although the crusader Breivik, who considered himself 100% Christian, being a noteworthy exception) and the right's nationalism that doesn't admit 'impurity' in its concept of the patria, is what is behind the current Islamophobia, not the secular left.
 
Dec 7, 2010
8,770
3
0
blutto said:
....well, as long as we are trying to deal with the idea of edgy satire what does youse think of the following....and do youse think CH would have published it?....

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Hot off the nonpress: The Khazarian Sex Predator Gene May Soon Be Found


January 06, 2015 / Gilad Atzmon

A Fictional News Item by Gilad Atzmon

Professor Yehuda Kosher from Be’er Chosen University, Israel, announced today that he and his team may be close to uncovering the JNA (Jewish DNA) and may be able to isolate the Khazarian Sex Predator (KSP) gene.

Professor Kosher, Israel’s leading evolutionary psychoarcheologist and a renown advocate of applied Eugenics told The Jewish Scientific Daily (JSD) that the apparent physical resemblance between Woody Alan and Alan Dershowitz’s facial features gives new hope for a scientific break through. Said Kosher in reference to allegations against Alan Dershowitz, “we may be able, for the first time, to isolate the KSP gene, and later, hopefully, to eliminate it from the genus of our people.

Professor Kosher assured the JSD that he and his team have managed to construct computer simulations that prove an overwhelming facial resemblance between the two New York Jewish celebrities. The Israeli scientist expressed the hope that former Professor Dershowitz could be enticed to agree to an examination by Kosher and his Israeli team. Any resulting scientific procedures may help to ensure the safety of American female minors (gentile).

When asked by the Jewish Magazine why he didn’t heed the call made today by Rabbi Shmuley for Jews to lend their support to Dershowitz regardless of his alleged misconduct, Professor Kosher replied angrily, “I am a Zionist, a true devoted Zionist, in accordance with the spirit of our forefathers, Herzl, Jabotinsky, Weizmann and Nordau. I believe that Zionism’s primary mission was to develop a new Jew who would more closely resemble an ethical and civilized human being. Tracing our most problematic genes from biblical times to the present has been my life’s work. As a Zionist and a near academic, Dershowitz should support our effort and allow me and my team to examine his brain, measure his skull and decode his genetic makeup so that we can compare it to Woody’s Jeffrey Epstein, Roman Polanski and other ethically troubled characters both Jews and gentile. If Dershowitz is to be a true Zionist like me, he must support our effort to make the Jews look better.”
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Cheers

:D oh man.

All in the name of protecting the gentiles I guess. :eek:
 
RetroActive said:
In Solidarity With a Free Press: Some More Blasphemous Cartoons
https://firstlook.org/theintercept/2015/01/09/solidarity-charlie-hebdo-cartoons/

Apropos...
on-the-first-day-man-created-god.jpg


“You, Christians, Jews, Muslims, Buddhists, Shintoists, Adventists, pantheists, the witnesses of this or that, Satanists, gurus, sorcerers, witches, saints, those that cut the foreskin off the baby’s little peckers, those that sew up the little girls vaginas, those that pray prostrate on the ground, those that pray on one leg only, those that bless themselves with the right hand, those that bless themselves with the left hand, those that vote for the Devil, because disappointed in God, those that pray for it to rain, those that pray to win the lottery, those that pray for it not to be Aids, those that eat their god in the form of a wafer, those that don’t ever pi$$ against the wind, those that give to charity to earn a spot in heaven, those that stone the scapegoat, those that don’t want to descend from apes, those that bless the armies, those that bless the hunt slayings, those that begin to live after death…
All of you, who can’t live without Santa Clause and without a heavenly castigator, take heed.
All of you, who can’t stand to be none other than worms with brains, take notice.

All of you, who have fabricated for yourselves a “perfect” and “good” god, as stupid, petty, bloody, jealous, avid for praise, as the most stupid, petty, bloody, jealous and avid for praise among you, listen up.

You, oh, all of you…

DON’T BREAK OUR BALLS!

Make your salaams in your huts, shut the door tightly and above all don’t corrupt our kids.

Don’t break our balls!”

François Cavanna (one of the founders of Charlie Hebdo)
 
Mar 13, 2009
16,853
2
0
RetroActive said:
Here's a really interesting interview with Norman Finkelstein:

Is Israel Unfairly Held to a Higher Standard? Norman Finkelstein on Reality Asserts Itself (1/4)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_l1qp6O13aA

He talks about his own folly, the human capacity for self deception and ideology. Personal, vulnerable.

The Making of Norman Finkelstein - Reality Asserts Itself (2/4)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mJz2r_vmRAc
Finkelstein is on mark. But his delivery can make him into the target. If he was a little less polemic, he could get better penetration. Writers like Amira Hass and Gideon Levy come off as avuncular, more sober. P'raps NF's rebuttal is a product of him losing his career in the academy for speaking the emperor's clothes.

No one likes being told they are wearing emperor's clothes.

IMO, NF would have been a political genius on the tier of Karl Rove if he wanted to be a political strategist.
 
Jan 27, 2013
1,383
0
0
rhubroma said:
Apropos...
on-the-first-day-man-created-god.jpg


“You, Christians, Jews, Muslims, Buddhists, Shintoists, Adventists, pantheists, the witnesses of this or that, Satanists, gurus, sorcerers, witches, saints, those that cut the foreskin off the baby’s little peckers, those that sew up the little girls vaginas, those that pray prostrate on the ground, those that pray on one leg only, those that bless themselves with the right hand, those that bless themselves with the left hand, those that vote for the Devil, because disappointed in God, those that pray for it to rain, those that pray to win the lottery, those that pray for it not to be Aids, those that eat their god in the form of a wafer, those that don’t ever pi$$ against the wind, those that give to charity to earn a spot in heaven, those that stone the scapegoat, those that don’t want to descend from apes, those that bless the armies, those that bless the hunt slayings, those that begin to live after death…
All of you, who can’t live without Santa Clause and without a heavenly castigator, take heed.
All of you, who can’t stand to be none other than worms with brains, take notice.

All of you, who have fabricated for yourselves a “perfect” and “good” god, as stupid, petty, bloody, jealous, avid for praise, as the most stupid, petty, bloody, jealous and avid for praise among you, listen up.

You, oh, all of you…

DON’T BREAK OUR BALLS!

Make your salaams in your huts, shut the door tightly and above all don’t corrupt our kids.

Don’t break our balls!”

François Cavanna (one of the founders of Charlie Hebdo)

Where the Most Pernicious Attacks on Freedom of Expression Come From
The Road From Paris to Damascus–and Back Again
http://www.counterpunch.org/2015/01/12/the-road-from-paris-to-damascus-and-back-again/

...and lol too.
 
Jan 27, 2013
1,383
0
0
blackcat said:
Finkelstein is on mark. But his delivery can make him into the target. If he was a little less polemic, he could get better penetration. Writers like Amira Hass and Gideon Levy come off as avuncular, more sober. P'raps NF's rebuttal is a product of him losing his career in the academy for speaking the emperor's clothes.

No one likes being told they are wearing emperor's clothes.

IMO, NF would have been a political genius on the tier of Karl Rove if he wanted to be a political strategist.

Norman takes it personally (it seems to me) and he certainly knows the wrath he'll be subjected too so he has to be forgiven somewhat if he gets a little zealous. The subject matter lends itself to polemics regardless. It's fun to watch him debate, busting Dershowitz was pretty classic.
 
Mar 13, 2009
16,853
2
0
RetroActive said:
Norman takes it personally (it seems to me) and he certainly knows the wrath he'll be subjected too so he has to be forgiven somewhat if he gets a little zealous. The subject matter lends itself to polemics regardless. It's fun to watch him debate, busting Dershowitz was pretty classic.
i sought of contradicted myself there on second reading <whoops> :eek:
 
It's getting pretty tiresome to always have to denounce the same lies by the same people. It's frightening to think that many readers might internalise them. :eek:

The Christian right's religious fascism >> 5 words, 3 lies. Fascism is not religious but atheistic. The Right-wing is not fascistic, Fascism comes from the left. And Christian's are not Fascists.

the mirror image of Islamic fascism >> Demagogical concept, of course. But if the premise is already demagogical, then this is all logical. Besides, the author of these words is a leftist, so he just confirms my statement, only he doesn't assume it. Islamo-fascism is a left-wing concept. QED!

(although the crusader Breivik, who considered himself 100% Christian, being a noteworthy exception) >> Already said and the poster knows it but is dishonest to the bones, so obviously he ignores it. Breivik is a freemason who constantly talks about a "Judeo-Christian" civilisation (so un-Christian) and makes Fascist salutes, so atheistic. 100% Christian? Trololol.

the right's nationalism that doesn't admit 'impurity' in its concept of the patria >>> Nationalism comes from the left and racism is left-wing through and through (Hitler being the most obvious example).

is what is behind the current Islamophobia, not the secular left. >>> Let's take a concrete example. On this very topic, ALL posters who have shown their Islamophobia (whether they be hysterical or rather smart) in the last week are left-wingers, all of them, including the poster who posted these words. It's obvious that Islamophobia is primarily a feature of the left-wing agenda, the current right-wing has only taken it over. But the current political Right is always a former Left. Philosophically they are all left, anyway.


----------

For speakers of French, on this forum, I think it's rather cool that a young kid still seems to have brains that work: here. Only problem is that he supports the FN but with the reasoning that he makes, I guess he'll quickly leave it. I don't really agree about the fact that we can't laugh of everything and I wouldn't use the terms "Islamist" or "Radical Islam" (terrorist are Wahhabits) but it's interesting.

I translated parts of it:

I’m not Charlie. Everybody’s saying « Je suis Charlie, je suis Charlie ». No you are a « Charlot », no more. I’m not among those who say « serve them right ». As a Catholic it’s one of the commandment that I ought to abide by “Thou shalt not murder” […] but I most of all regret the thousands of dead, in the different wars around us. Innocent people who are killed by thousands. In Iraq, for example. Since the Americans messed it up, many innocent people have been killed and nobody cried about them. And now 12 dead, well it’s nothing compared to the thousands of dead since Hollande came up and about whom he – Hollande – don’t give a damn about, but really don’t! All dead are not equally as valuable. It’s a scandal. I’d like to see a demonstration for every Christian and Muslim that have been killed by the Islamic State, if there are demonstrations for Charlie Hebdo. It’s a case in which each dead has different value. I don’t agree. […] I’m not one of those idiots with a black board […], you are all people who have had a good life, full of emotions, you can’t have a good judgment and a logical and consistent reasoning if you are on emotion. It’s a little Dreyfus affair, emotion is in the mix, everybody’s passionate about it […]. The Iraqi Christians, there had three or four demonstrations, some SOS calls but that’s it. The dead in Palestine, too. Thousands of them, innocent people. […] We haven’t sent charities or whatever, we haven’t done anything. Let’s stop with this double standard.

And then all the political manoeuvring behind. Charb’s girlfriend is a former UMP, the economic columnist was an active political activist, I’m sorry but these are no simple journalists who defend freedom of speech, if there are politicians involved, it remains a very little independent reality. This was no unbiased newspaper. It wasn’t a newspaper for caricature and the burlesque. It wasn’t Molière. What they published was repugnant. I don’t like Voltaire but compared to them Voltaire was a brilliant and refined guy. So now I observe the facts and these guys were in (financial) trouble, […] an attack and now three public broadcaster are going to send them some funds. […] How can public broadcasters, paid by our tax money give funds to Charlie Hebdo. I don’t agree. I don’t want to send bucks to Charlie Hebdo! […] The state now pays Charlie Hebdo. It’s not normal. A British channel said they would give some 130k€. Google wants to give 250k€. Schwarzenegger said on his Facebook: “I subscribed to Charlie Hebdo and I beg all Internet users who follow me to do the same.” […] All this does not sound very clean to me. I’m only observing facts, in a depassionate way. […]
Some are dead, yeah, and you are shocked because it’s happening in France. You see that so far your life has been rosy and that nothing has happened around you. France is relatively calm, we are lucky to be living in France in the 21st century and since the second half of the 20th century it was relatively cool, we haven’t had too many attacks, too many killed. That’s where you have to realise how lucky you have been. You are dazed by 12 dead. Do you realise how many have been killed in other countries? Hundreds of them every year, political wars […], the Islamic State that brings phenomenal loads of dead … Heroes! Each time I’m turning up the radio, I hear “heroes are dead”, “Guys who died for freedom, the fatherland” and all. I’m going to tell you, in their lifetime they were bast*rds. Bast*rds because they put the lives of hundreds of people at risk. […] the lives of police officers – as we saw – who are there to protect them, the hundreds of French people living abroad, just because of their caricature because the “Islamist” – I’m talking about an Islamist and not about a Muslim – will say Charlie Hebdo is French and so he will kill French people. And then “heroes of freedom”? Stop with that. Charlie transgressed freedom because above freedom, you have respect. […] You have to respect people’s identity: it can be race, religion, a lot of things, you cannot behave that way, in public on top of that. In private, okay but in public, you can’t do that. You do a lot of harm. You bring trouble to people, they feel attacked. “Yeah but they were the only one to show to the others’ crap” etc etc. Religions, leave them alone. Because Catholicism hasn’t come to annoy you. Muslims, even the Jews, leave everybody alone. Some “Islamists” might have annoyed you but it’s not a reason to attack people that way. It’s ridiculous. If you don’t agree, you can always debate in an intelligent way, etc. You don’t do such obscene things on religion. That’s not freedom. There’s no respect. Freedom should be soaked with respect. If you can laugh about everything, then I can laugh at a disabled person, without anybody being shocked. His handicap is a part of his identity. Religion is part of the identity of millions of people. […] In public you can’t laugh about everything. And if you can laugh about everything, then why all this fuss around Dieudonné M’Bala M’Bala and around his acts. Why doesn’t he have the freedom to speak? If you have the right to say what you want, then leave Dieudonné alone. If Charlie Hebdo has the right to speak – in all impunity - with their disgusting obscenities – I’m only talking about the newspaper, not the persons, I didn’t know them –, then let Dieudonné speak in all impunity. […] You can laugh about everything, Dieudonné laughs about everything. “Yes but there’s a lack of detachment” [what an attorney general said at one of Dieudonné’s trials], baloney! […] That’s the evidence that you can’t laugh about everything. You have a double standard. Dieudonné is a dissident but Charlie Hebdo is respectable, not politically oriented at all, … So in the “je suis Charlie” logic, I’d rather identify with the millions of dead around the world, the Christians killed and the Muslims killed in order to protect the Christians and who had refused a certain “Islamic radicalism”. I’m rather one of those. On the other hand I can’t be one of them because I haven’t lived anything they have lived. I’m just a little crap who has always had everything he wished at home. I’m just myself. I can see as models, people that I found heroic but I’m just myself. […]
 
Echoes said:
It's getting pretty tiresome to always have to denounce the same lies by the same people. It's frightening to think that many readers might internalise them. :eek:

The Christian right's religious fascism >> 5 words, 3 lies. Fascism is not religious but atheistic. The Right-wing is not fascistic, Fascism comes from the left. And Christian's are not Fascists.

the mirror image of Islamic fascism >> Demagogical concept, of course. But if the premise is already demagogical, then this is all logical. Besides, the author of these words is a leftist, so he just confirms my statement, only he doesn't assume it. Islamo-fascism is a left-wing concept. QED!

(although the crusader Breivik, who considered himself 100% Christian, being a noteworthy exception) >> Already said and the poster knows it but is dishonest to the bones, so obviously he ignores it. Breivik is a freemason who constantly talks about a "Judeo-Christian" civilisation (so un-Christian) and makes Fascist salutes, so atheistic. 100% Christian? Trololol.

the right's nationalism that doesn't admit 'impurity' in its concept of the patria >>> Nationalism comes from the left and racism is left-wing through and through (Hitler being the most obvious example).

is what is behind the current Islamophobia, not the secular left. >>> Let's take a concrete example. On this very topic, ALL posters who have shown their Islamophobia (whether they be hysterical or rather smart) in the last week are left-wingers, all of them, including the poster who posted these words. It's obvious that Islamophobia is primarily a feature of the left-wing agenda, the current right-wing has only taken it over. But the current political Right is always a former Left. Philosophically they are all left, anyway.


----------

For speakers of French, on this forum, I think it's rather cool that a young kid still seems to have brains that work: here. Only problem is that he supports the FN but with the reasoning that he makes, I guess he'll quickly leave it. I don't really agree about the fact that we can't laugh of everything and I wouldn't use the terms "Islamist" or "Radical Islam" (terrorist are Wahhabits) but it's interesting.

I translated parts of it:

You do realize, however, that fascisti abided by the same intolerance and thug tactics, which drove the Catholic inquisitions? It's either our way or we beat you up, or have you killed.

To thus make the socialist nature of fascism a leftist trait, when Mussolini abondoned the traditional workers movement, because founded upon a solidarity (yes, this, at the time, was left) that didn't contemplate violence and war, is absurd. Then one only has to ask themselves who were the anti-fascists (partigiani) to know that the fascisti were on the right.
 
frenchfry said:
I simply try to be a good person. All the labels mean nothing, and get in the way of tolerence.

Oh but know we have the one thought viewpoint, which gets passed off as less ideological, but is in fact establishing new and more insidious forms of conformism and intolerance.

Nobody bemoans the old ideologies, but when we see what has taken place since 89 under the aegis of the one thought view, to which the problems Europe faces are not estranged, including the recrudescence of terrorism, then the line of so-called neutrality is hardly adequate.
 
Jan 27, 2013
1,383
0
0
rhubroma said:
Oh but know we have the one thought viewpoint, which gets passed off as less ideological, but is in fact establishing new and more insidious forms of conformism and intolerance.

Nobody bemoans the old ideologies, but when we see what has taken place since 89 under the aegis of the one thought view, to which the problems Europe faces are not estranged, including the recrudescence of terrorism, then the line of so-called neutrality is hardly adequate.

Recognizing that's it's all b.s. that we're making up isn't necessarily a practical response but it is a good reminder now and again. Living according to our own conscience is worthwhile, imo, no?

"trying to be good", it kind of makes me laugh actually but it beats the alternative I suppose.
 
RetroActive said:
Recognizing that's it's all b.s. that we're making up isn't necessarily a practical response but it is a good reminder now and again. Living according to our own conscience is worthwhile, imo, no?

"trying to be good", it kind of makes me laugh actually but it beats the alternative I suppose.

I don't subscribe to a belief that all is b.s. In fact it takes discernment to see through all the b.s. and the principles this presupposes. What I'd say is missing is objectivity. What this world in fact needs is less people "trying to be good" and more people "trying to be objective," considering that if there is any good to be found, then without objectivity it surely won't be had.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.