2 of 2
2
Islam and the Future of Liberalism
Posted: 20 March 2012 11:01 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 16 ]  
Newbie
Rank
Total Posts:  11
Joined  2012-02-02

[softwarevisualization says:

“Where things are going is towards democracy , representational government, a unification of international law and a reduction of certain kinds of personal liberties or more specifically privacy while at the same time we have an increase in transparency between government and the people. It’s going to happen that way because it has to happen that way, there is no other choice.”

REPLY: No. Where things are going is where you said earlier. We are moving toward One-World Government, that can certainly never meet the needs of the many diverse nations, peoples, religions and races of mankind. It will be a government established only to uphold the needs and status quo of Multi-National Corporations and their minions. If there are elections at all, just to humor the masses and give them the impression that they actually have a voice, one will only be able to vote for THEIR candidates who they have in THEIR pocket. Actually it’s pretty much that way already in this country. It just hasn’t reached a global level yet. Let’s face it. The real winner of this year’s Presidential and Congressional elections will not be Obama or Romney; it will be Citibank, Exxon, Fannie Mae, General Motors, Aetna, The Trilateral Commission, The Bilderbergs, etc. etc.

And yes, you are quite right in saying: “It’s going to happen that way because it has to happen that way, there is no other choice.”
Yes, because everyone has been bought and paid for and elections are just an illusion. But you see, we are so complacent in this country and so dependent on entitlements that we dare not oppose the system for tear of losing our entitlements and we will vote for the candidate that ensures our entitlements rather than for the one who can do the most good for the country over all. Good people like Ralph Nader and Ron Paul will never have a chance because they are not “Part of the Plan.”

And as you also said: We are moving toward “a reduction of certain kinds of personal liberties or more specifically privacy while at the same time we have an increase in transparency between government and the people.” We may have an increase in transparency, but that’s only because the criminals in DC have grown so arrogant that they no longer even try to hide their actions because they know that there isn’t a thing that we the people can do about it. As we speak, the government is spending $770 million dollars on repairing the infrastructure and mosques in Egypt while cutting benefits to Americans and telling us to tighten our belts because these are hard times.  See: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tlI_A64sEF4

 

 

Profile
 
 
Posted: 20 March 2012 07:09 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 17 ]  
Member
RankRankRank
Total Posts:  147
Joined  2011-05-06

I am not getting slack in my schedule to reply yet.  More specific replies tomorrow evening ....Very quickly :


The idea that people in the M E are not fit for democracy is an old prejudice on the part of the west going back at least as far as WWI and T E Lawrence’s attempts to secure a seat at the table of free nations for this region. To say that attempts to overthrow despotic regimes and establish democracies is something the west has been pursuing for 100 years, as the previous poster asserted is to show total ignorance regarding the history of the M E and its painful relationship with the west.

 


That’s not meant as an insult only a statement of fact. Any westerner who has not made a specifIc effort to read the history of
the region is in the same state.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 21 March 2012 08:46 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 18 ]  
Member
RankRankRank
Total Posts:  286
Joined  2011-04-26

Excellent post Mr. Software.  I was literally taught in high school that democracy is good for white kids like us but communism was more suitable for Chinese.  We biologically know that all humans are biologically the same.  There can be no ‘system’ for one group as opposed to another.  To paraphrase Bruce Lee (speaking about martial arts styles), there can be no array of styles unless one individual has a different number of arms and legs or different biological requirements.  The human animal, like other species, have specific, basic requirements that are scientifically provable.  Humans suffer, physically and mentally when oppressed and brutalized and thrive when free.  This fact doesn’t alter regardless of skin color, culture, hairstyle, etc.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 21 March 2012 08:56 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 19 ]  
Newbie
Rank
Total Posts:  11
Joined  2012-02-02

Yes, however, and I am sure Sam Harris would agree, some people simply choose to be enslaved if it gives them some kind of mental or physical security. That’s why people CHOOSE to remain in abusive, massochistic religions even though they know that there isn’t a word of truth to them or any empiricle evidence for their trustworthiness. All humans may be biologically the same, but mentally, they are very different due to information that has been passed down to them as TRUTH, whether it is or isn’t. And they are mentally different due to education and environment also. To say that we are all biologically the same would be as foolish as saying that all felines or all canines are the same and have the same needs, and they most certainly are not.the same, nor do they have the same needs.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 21 March 2012 09:45 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 20 ]  
Member
RankRankRank
Total Posts:  286
Joined  2011-04-26

I don’t think anyone rational, sane person chooses to be enslaved.  They choose not to resist or fight against it.  On the contrary, I do think that each individual species has the same or very similar requirements of survival.  They are just slightly adapted to specific diets or whatever based on their environmental niche.  This has to be true for the human animal.  There is not a sub-species of human that doesn’t require water and food and a specific temperature range to regulate our own body temperatures.  There is not sub-species of human that requires oppression and torture.  Humans can be slightly adapted to specific climates, etc.  I keep and study reptiles and it is astounding how their requirements and behavior are so precisely exactly alike despite their adaptations to different niches.  I observed parallel adaptation at an age before I ever understood evolutionary theory. 

The idea of the passing down of TRUTH is the core of the issue.  A rational, reasoning human willing to make choices (as opposed to free will) can think on its own and reject the group think.  It’s physically possible and humans do it all the time and escape the insanity of their specific culture.  Humans who refuse to think or question for themselves and passively go along with the group, pay the price.  They always will.  Sometimes they benefit, sometimes they lose.  It’s the roll of the device if an individual is not pro-active with regard to living on earth.  I pretty much assume that the majority of people on this board have consciously re-examined and rejected a lot of the cultural bull@#$ that we were exposed to and indoctrinated in (Sam Harris seems to be an exception with regard to religion.  He was raised an atheist.).  For myself, Bruce Lee’s borrowed, secularized concept of emptying your cup is precisely what led me to question everything when I reached adulthood.  Then I slowly re-examined and re-affirmed the concepts that I felt were reality based and helpful while rejecting the noise or burdensome garbage like religion, certain customs and traditions.  Following the herd is not pre-determined.  It can be resisted, not easily but it’s possible.  Like all other life forms,  humans are not special as to be guaranteed survival.  We band and cooperate to increase the chance to survive and a culture or tribe that is self-destructive is doomed, refuses to adapt stagnates and perishes.

[ Edited: 21 March 2012 10:06 AM by mormovies]
Profile
 
 
Posted: 21 March 2012 12:46 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 21 ]  
Newbie
Rank
Total Posts:  11
Joined  2012-02-02

mormovies says: ” A rational, reasoning human willing to make choices (as opposed to free will) can think on its own and reject the group think.  It’s physically possible and humans do it all the time and escape the insanity of their specific culture.  Humans who refuse to think or question for themselves and passively go along with the group, pay the price.  They always will.  Sometimes they benefit, sometimes they lose….....We band and cooperate to increase the chance to survive and a culture or tribe that is self-destructive is doomed, refuses to adapt stagnates and perishes.”


REPLY: I agree with you 100%, but there are those on here who would say that we have an obligation to “civilize” the world; and that it is our duty to spread Democracy and Christianity to the ends of the earth because those are the BEST sytems known to man, and that is simply not true. We have no right to force our conclusions on any other culture just because they work well for us, and yet that is exactly what Western Man, in his arrogance, has done for the last 500 years, and he continues to do so.


“Softwarevisualization” in particular hypothesizes that since the needs of all of mankind are the same, that it is our duty to democritize the Middle East and ultimately create a One-World Government that will maintain peace and order, but at whose expense? While our basic needs for existence like: food, water, fresh air, oxygen, exercise and sleep may be the same, our spiritual, philosophical, dietary and cultural needs are NOT the same; otherwise we would not have developed so many diverse cultures would we?

So what if some cultures are backward by our standards? They have lasted close to 3,000 years; that isn’t such a bad track record. Western man may have the most scientifically advanced culture and the most advanced technology, but is that necessarily good? It is precisely our technology and marketing that has created the “need” for the manufacture of so many unecessary products, which manufacturing is what is causing global warming and pollution worldwide; not to mention the depletion of fuel and natural resources.

 

Our political science has made it possible for 2-3% of our population to own most of the wealth of the country while everyone else just gets by and even then, sometimes only by virtue of entitlements, which is simply a way of buying votes. By distorting the concept of “freedom of speech” and applying that to multi-national corporations, we have nulified freedom of speech and vote by the common people and have turned the country from a nation “of the people, by the people and for the people” to one of the corporations and banks, by the corporations and banks and of the corporations and banks.


Our food technology makes it possible to feed more people than conventional farming methods, but at the expense of people’s health. Most of our food is produced under unhealthy and unnatural conditions like the massive factory type farms for chickens, pigs and fish; all pumped full of antibiotics and growth hormones. And our produce is all becoming genetically engineered and is soaked in poisonous insecticides that are even killing birds and the bee population. And our technology has brought us to the point where we conceive that it is now possible to erradicate all of mankind through a nuclear exchange over some petty issues. Is that necessarily a culture that we want to inflict on anyone else?

Profile
 
 
Posted: 21 March 2012 01:15 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 22 ]  
Member
RankRankRank
Total Posts:  286
Joined  2011-04-26

I Agree.  The problem is the concept of moral ‘duty’  to spread the ‘best system.’  Unless you believe in a god, an afterlife day of judgement or mystical forces, we are not born, as are all other animals, with a ‘duty’ to anyone or anything but ourselves and then to others as we perceive and judge them as being important to us for whatever reason (emotional, physical, economically, etc).  Also, we know from trial and error what works.  Forcing our ideas, even about freedom, does not always get positive results.  I maintain that our most peaceful and powerful weapons today are not nuclear but cultural.  That is our key attraction to rest of the world, even to other relatively free nations.  For example, the exportation of rock n roll and pornography are proven potent weapons at this point in time and we should bombard the extremist religious cultures with it.  It usually gets quick, positive results. 

I think the foundation and original intention of our system is nice and all but in practice we are losing ground rapidly.  Our basic freedoms and rights are evaporating on a daily basis.  I would hope other countries in the midst of fighting their repression actually set up a better, less collectivist system.

The idea of a one world government is ludicrous.  Massive, top down, centralized government does not work.  The more localized and customized government is, the more effective it is.  We know these and always go against our best judgement and experience.  Until there is one world language and culture, this is a bad joke of an idea.  Kill it already!  What are we, the Roman Empire?

[ Edited: 21 March 2012 01:27 PM by mormovies]
Profile
 
 
Posted: 28 March 2012 08:16 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 23 ]  
Member
RankRankRank
Total Posts:  147
Joined  2011-05-06

I find it impossible to carry on this conversation because you refuse to stay on one point and what passes for evidence from you is just more unsubstantiated opinion taking the form of further complaints.

As I said, I will hold a discussion with anyone who can sustain a discussion per the rules I linked to earlier and who has not been identified by me as a troll or a sociopath.

Best of luck to you.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 28 March 2012 08:28 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 24 ]  
Member
RankRankRank
Total Posts:  286
Joined  2011-04-26

Good luck.  It is difficult to discuss anything when someone brings an agenda of mystical baggage to a scientific or abstract secular discussion.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 16 January 2013 08:42 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 25 ]  
Newbie
Rank
Total Posts:  11
Joined  2013-01-16

http://www.rediff.com/news/slide-show/slide-show-1-i-dont-believe-muslims-are-problem-and-islam-a-threat/20130116.htm

according to Willam Dalrymple: ‘I don’t believe Muslims are a problem and Islam a threat’

would appreciate a rebuttal from Mr.Sam Harris on this!

the above interview comes right after the mutilation of Indian soldiers by the Pakistani army .

Profile
 
 
Posted: 17 January 2013 03:55 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 26 ]  
Jr. Member
Avatar
RankRank
Total Posts:  55
Joined  2013-01-09

No, ask Michelle Bachmann or Rick Santorum or Focus on the family or the Heritage Foundation or just anyone in Kansas if they want a theocracy and they’ll tell you that this nation was founded as a Christian nation.

softwarevisualization, this statement contains a partial fallacy. I am a Kansas native, still living in the state. I am also an atheist, among many here, and I can assure you we would NOT want to establish a theocracy nor do we believe this country was founded as a Christian nation. Just wanted to set the record straight. BTW, I agree with practically all of your points and rebuttals.

 Signature 

Cypher: “Why oh why didn’t I take the BLUE pill?”

Profile
 
 
   
2 of 2
2
 
‹‹ Free Will      Sam Vs. Dan ››
RSS 2.0     Atom Feed