Brits- better ships, guns and a flexible language. Small enough geographically to condense spirit and ambition. Needy for raw materials. Maybe a bad case of "little man's disease" led to empire.
Muslim countries razor out references to Israel- even maps. The West eats too much and buys too much- a sign of low self-worth. Technology is not above and beyond morals whether Wall Street or automated weapons but somehow people believe otherwise. On Oct 29, 6:32 pm, Allan H <[email protected]> wrote: > Sorry your video is currently not available.. will try later I did some > looking up to understand the raping of Nang I have actually known about for > a long time ,, seems even before the internet why I don't recall any more.. > Maybe it is from the horrible abuse and treatment of the american Indian > by my own government. and other minorities.. > > I think people want to believe the soft sell packaged lies.. people > apparently prefer to live in fear and accept lies rather than face the > truth.. as for governments that color truth worse is it the USA or > Great Britain? Both Countries seem to bury their heads in the sand when it > comes to coloring their history. still am trying to figure out > the British empire. > > Hopefully the Occupy Movement will have some effect positive I hope if the > one percent want to control the wealth and government they at least to > bear their fair share of the expenses based on percentage of ownership. > Allan > > > > > > On Sat, Oct 29, 2011 at 7:51 PM, archytas <[email protected]> wrote: > > The current crisis is not one of banking or economics, but something > > much more basic. One might say this is our attitude towards 'machines > > of loving grace'. In short, we live in the fantasy that "the machine" > > will put things right, returning to an equilibrium as our > > interventions are little more than 'of mice and men'. The real world > > of the environment and the exchange world of economics return to > > equilibrium after fluctuations. It's very tempting to believe this - > > one might see Gaia as a case in point - the planet and other species > > flourishing after we've crazed ourselves to extinction through > > consumption and wars. > > > You can pick up the ideas of 'all watched over by machines of loving > > grace' here - > >http://www.sbs.com.au/ondemand/video/2160186460/All-Watched-Over-By-M... > > > A review with an economic twist can be found here - > >http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2011/10/the-natural-chaos-of-markets.html > > > My own work has often focused on the difference between espoused > > theories and theories-in-action. In some subjects like chemistry the > > relationship between theory and practice is good - if you follow the > > rules and recipes you get what you intended and the explanations make > > sense if you study enough. There is a working core, you can trust or > > check the work of others and speculation can eventually be tested on > > what is not accepted as 'settled'. In the human sciences this is much > > more difficult, not least because we do not exclude much in human > > society that prevents science. Few of us have much aptitude for > > science, perhaps especially for its negation of ideology soaked up > > from community. > > > I always noted as a teacher that I was more comfortable saying 'you > > just can't handle the maths' (unlikely for me as I'd teach people like > > that without the stuff), than in saying 'you just don't get argument > > because you can't let go of any prejudice'. Teaching people to think > > for themselves contains a paradox. One finds much one is expected to > > teach based on dross. I know of no country in which history is taught > > without gross ideological distortion. We hear the Japanese rip out > > pages in textbooks on the 'rape of Nanking' yet it's rare to find > > Brits who know much of our squalid imperialism and involvement in much > > similar. In the middle east you will find a more accurate picture of > > the Crusades than we get, but the Jihad that is the mirror image is > > revered. > > > Most people like to imagine themselves as individual, but if we're > > honest we are subjects of machines of loving grace. One makes one's > > way in an economy (machine) on a planet (environmental machine). I > > think these are only "machines" because we don't examine them. > > Examination often ends in paradox - logical positivism eventually > > conceded its own quest to extirpate metaphysics was - oops - > > metaphysical. My own guess is that rigorous thinking seeks to > > discover and eliminate dross - this involves a great deal of courage > > in accepting you are likely made of same oneself! > > > I'm a maverick systems theorist and conceive of our social-political > > arguments (and the systems themselves) as houses of cards. one looks > > for the soft spots that can bring the lot down or as places to put in > > effort to keep the ball rolling. No argument survives this process > > more than twenty seconds with such soft spots arising. Most don't > > have either the energy or tools to keep going and run to the 'bliss' > > of the machine (religion, patriotism, left and right etc.). We are > > thus robots of one 'machine' or another, not individuals, hardly > > people if we're not careful. > > -- > ( > ) > |_D Allan > > Life is for moral, ethical and truthful living.- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text -
