We might either enchant or infuriate the gatekeepers of Heaven or Hell and they'd send us back to try, try again! :-)
One pair of mittens done somehow as I have a scratched cornea- a tear duct calcified- have you ever? Will take eyedrops for a week and go back to doc. Seem even better today- can drive, etc. but sometimes stick a patch on like a pirate. Very funny. What is Innocence? Wharton style? Are we supposed to be innocent or savey to the world and its ways and remain trusting and hopeful for the best in ourselves and others? Wasn't Eliz.I the head of the Church of Egland via Henry VIII? On Nov 21, 12:06 pm, archytas <[email protected]> wrote: > I sometimes think of the innocence as a catalyst Molly. Speeds things > up, slows them down, maybe provides the shell for the reactions of > others - stays broadly unchanged but gets poisoned from time to time > and may have to change 'shape'. A few bigots in the Anglican Church > prevented women bishops for a few more years this week - much against > the majority (two-thirds vote needed). It turns out all religion in > the UK is 'free' to be sexist. I'd rather make my pleas to god > through Molly or Gabby than a man - but I'll be in hell with rigsy > anyway - you can drink whiskey there without hangovers! It's 12 miles > south of Oslo as I remember rigs! > > Good question Lee. My guess is the answer is biological and the > cultural method control fraud. Hierarchy is a religious word. > > On 21 Nov, 15:59, Lee Douglas <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > Heheh I was gonna crack a funny about they and belife and drugs, but meh I > > just can't be bothered. > > > But is there a they who seek to control via these or any other methods? > > Naaaa. > > > On Monday, 19 November 2012 09:18:25 UTC, andrew vecsey wrote: > > > With drugs and mass media they control our desires and with drugs and > > > schools they control our thinking. The only simple solution I can think of > > > is not to play their game. Just refuse to buy what they offer to sell. . > > > > On Sunday, November 18, 2012 9:47:11 PM UTC+1, Allan Heretic wrote: > > > >> globalization can be very beneficial and granted there are many self > > >> centered individuals and corporations that have that have little > > >> concern for others or our world.. but one thing that is coming out of > > >> it they can not control what people thing and desire their world to > > >> be.. Little by little I see people reclaiming the dreams of a better > > >> world. > > >> Oh well what can you expect from an old hippie > > >> Allan > > > >> On Sun, Nov 18, 2012 at 7:43 PM, archytas <[email protected]> wrote: > > >> > Andrew is obviously right when one considers where our wealth is > > >> > ending-up. This group is broadly parochial, white and barely > > >> > understands what it excludes and how. We are reliant on centralised > > >> > technology that is soon to force us to a format we don't want. > > >> > Rigsy's question is about right. Previous globalisation was > > >> > colonising and I suspect most of what we are witnessing now is in that > > >> > model. It would be good to make the move in emphasis Molly suggests, > > >> > but the signs in the underlying business model indicate the opposite > > >> > to me - currently remaining in advertising and making a killing in > > >> > market share. There is another (dated) form of globalisation in the > > >> > phrase 'workers of the world unite' and it must be clear this has been > > >> > resisted by the powerful other than in their own 'guilds'. My list on > > >> > what globalisation is would be long and rather vague - including > > >> > teaching foreign students with bare English textbook answers I kn ow > > >> > to be rot. James Bond has globalised but not decent water, food and > > >> > housing for all - let alone freedom from the kind of idiots on all > > >> > sides who keep such stuff as the Arab-Israeli conflict going. > > > >> > We need realistic optimism - but this means embracing really bad news > > >> > on climate (worse than we think) and history (much worse than we > > >> > think) in order to see how we get some decent stuff done amongst the > > >> > enemies of open society. Globalisation is getting very real in the > > >> > sense of telepresence (I could be operated on in Bolton by a surgeon > > >> > in Madras) and other varieties of the embodiment of knowledge that > > >> > will allow remote and even home manufacturing. > > > >> > Postmodernism (which I regard as the move to modernism we have never > > >> > had) is bringing about a legitimation crisis. I am broadly (but not > > >> > completely) free of the religious dross taught in youth and chronic > > >> > copy-teachers who told me Julius Caesar invaded Britain in 53AD and > > >> > that humans have 24 pairs of chromosomes like other apes. To discover > > >> > the extent of ideological dross in my education I travelled. The > > >> > Internet's supposedly global reach does not even compare. How could > > >> > anything be more parochial that Faceflop and Twatter? What would be > > >> > want to globalise - does anyone ever ask us? How about freedom from > > >> > work as means of income? > > > >> > On 18 Nov, 14:11, Molly <[email protected]> wrote: > > >> >> I disagree, Andrew, and take a view more like Alan's. Globalization > > >> >> occurs when more folks operate from a world-centric life view (not > > >> ego- > > >> >> centric or ethno-centric), more countries are trading goods and > > >> >> services, and more folks have access to goods and services from other > > >> >> countries. This group is comprised of folks from many different parts > > >> >> of the world. A good example. > > > >> >> On Nov 18, 4:09 am, andrew vecsey <[email protected]> wrote: > > > >> >> > Globalization is reverting to the ownership and control of > > >> everything world > > >> >> > wide by the few. That is the danger of it all. > > > >> >> > On Saturday, November 17, 2012 7:41:31 PM UTC+1, Allan Heretic > > >> wrote: > > > >> >> > > I think realistically globalization is revering to the access to > > >> >> > > everything world wide > > >> >> > > Allan > > > >> >> > > On Sat, Nov 17, 2012 at 3:19 PM, rigsy03 > > >> >> > > <[email protected]<javascript:>> > > >> >> > > wrote: > > >> >> > > > But what does the term "globalization" mean? It is an abstract > > >> term. > > >> >> > > > (Sort of like Alexander's "empire" at his death- to be defined > > >> by the > > >> >> > > > strongest?) > > > >> >> > > > On Nov 17, 4:18 am, Allan H <[email protected]> wrote: > > >> >> > > >> I agree with you Saris are very beautiful and believe me that > > >> can get > > >> >> > > >> into the pricey range. Her wedding saris was well over 30,000 > > >> Euro and > > >> >> > > >> her mothers was just as bad.. was never told the exact price.. > > >> but > > >> >> > > >> it was out of the finest silk.. > > > >> >> > > >> There are benefits to globalization ,, unfortunately those > > >> benefits > > >> >> > > >> are easily destroyed by those people and companies that are > > >> extremely > > >> >> > > >> selfish and uncaring... Greedy is to soft a word for their > > >> >> > > >> activities.. > > >> >> > > >> Allan > > > >> >> > > >> On Sat, Nov 17, 2012 at 2:16 AM, rigsy03 <[email protected]> > > >> wrote: > > >> >> > > >> > A great question- what is it? Maybe it is what the major > > >> powers/ > > >> >> > > >> > economies tell us it is. Facts betray the huge inequities > > >> among the > > >> >> > > >> > nations/humanity. I would hope we don't lose some of our > > >> differences > > >> >> > > >> > and adopt one style and language. Saris are my favorite to > > >> watch and > > >> >> > > >> > think Indian and Asian women beat out Americans- the men > > >> aren't bad > > >> >> > > >> > either. Remember when we were all so separated and the > > >> "other" seemed > > >> >> > > >> > to look the same- a kind of blindness, I guess. > > > >> >> > > >> > On Nov 15, 8:47 pm, archytas <[email protected]> wrote: > > >> >> > > >> >> The big question is what is globalising. In part this is > > >> stuff we > > >> >> > > >> >> don't want. We are still haunted by superstition, sexism > > >> and > > >> >> > > >> >> imperialism. I'd like to see more of our economies about > > >> building > > >> >> > > >> >> safe communities and see foreign policies and our limited > > >> vision of > > >> >> > > >> >> 'efficiency' as the major bars to this. Disease is likely > > >> >> > > >> >> globalising, the ability to make WMDs and take part in > > >> manufacturing > > >> >> > > >> >> for war. > > > >> >> > > >> >> On 15 Nov, 23:34, rigsy03 <[email protected]> wrote: > > > >> >> > > >> >> > I would substitute ignorance for indifference. > > > >> >> > > >> >> > On Nov 15, 10:00 am, Vam <[email protected]> wrote: > > > >> >> > > >> >> > > Untill nationalisn has distinctive meaning, political > > >> and > > >> >> > > cultural, and > > >> >> > > >> >> > > economic, free movement of people can only be a pipe > > >> dream. > > > >> >> > > >> >> > > And the "meaning," it must be remembered, is an > > >> emotional - > > >> >> > > mental thing... > > >> >> > > >> >> > > not merely intellectual. That's how phenomenal > > >> dimensions of any > > >> >> > > thing > > >> >> > > >> >> > > extends ... from indifference to emotional values, > > >> covering > > >> >> > > almost > > >> >> > > >> >> > > everything existential in society, politics and > > >> economics ... > > >> >> > > and to > > >> >> > > >> >> > > intellectual conviction, which is singularly absent in > > >> >> > > everything > > >> >> > > >> >> > > experiential that individuals bring into their attitudes > > >> and > > >> >> > > everyday > > >> >> > > >> >> > > decision-making at their present level evolution. > > > >> >> > > >> >> > > One of the most intellectual calls was issued by Marx. > > >> No one > > >> >> > > could stand > > >> >> > > >> >> > > up to its rigour ... not the champions and subscribers, > > >> not the > > >> >> > > staus > > >> >> > > >> >> > > quoist rest of the world. Capitalism stays, because it > > >> factors > > >> >> > > in our > > >> >> > > >> >> > > emotional drives, not because it is most just and fair > > >> to the > > >> >> > > weakest in > > >> >> > > >> >> > > our midst ! > > > >> >> > > >> >> > > Au revoir ... > > > >> >> > > >> >> > > On Thursday, November 15, 2012 8:15:49 PM UTC+5:30, Lee > > >> Douglas > > >> >> > > wrote: > > > >> >> > > >> >> > > > Meh! As you know I'm all for freedom of movement, > > >> live where > > >> >> > > you like, if > > >> >> > > >> >> > > > much of India wish to migrate to The USA and settle in > > >> the Mid > > >> >> > > West then go > > >> >> > > >> >> > > > to it. However with around only 3-5% of > > ... > > read more »- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - --
