Re: Re: Re: Re: Racism ? How's that implied ?

[Craig Weinberg]

On Thursday, September 13, 2012 8:33:47 AM UTC-4, rclough wrote:
>
> Hi Craig Weinberg   
>
> The fact is that the only incentive businesses look to is profit. 
> So demonizing profit doesn't do any good. 
> And urging them to hire workers doesn't work. 
>
>
Sounds exactly like cancer. The only incentive cancer looks to is growth.  
As long as any institution partitions itself off from responsibility to the 
full spectrum of human experience I think it is doomed to be a force for 
oppression. You can tell when this happens because the effect of the 
institution is inverted to its cause. Businesses perpetuate financial 
bondage rather than freedom. Hospitals perpetuate sickness and misery 
rather than health. Schools neutralize intellectual curiosity. Religions 
foment intolerance and the abuse of the innocent. It's inevitable since by 
definition the first order of business for an institution is to ensure its 
own growth and survival at all costs...which becomes the sole purpose 
forever.

Craig


>  Clough, rcl...@verizon.net  
> 9/13/2012   
> Leibniz would say, "If there's no God, we'd have to invent him   
> so that everything could function." 
> - Receiving the following content -   
> From: Craig Weinberg   
> Receiver: everything-list   
> Time: 2012-09-12, 20:03:27 
> Subject: Re: Re: Re: Racism ? How's that implied ? 
>
>
>
>
> On Tuesday, September 11, 2012 8:32:21 AM UTC-4, rclough wrote: 
> Hi Craig Weinberg   
>
> I am intolerant of stupidity and deception, particularly 
> when the idea of carbon credits pops up. This suggests that   
> "Global warming" is just a method of raising taxes, 
> diminishing coal and oil,  and even globally sharing the wealth.   
>
> Thankfully china won't go along with this stupidity. 
> It all seems to be politics rather than science.   
>
> I don't know enough about it to say too much about it. I think that the 
> point is to make it political so 
>
> that the greatest polluters will have an incentive to pollute less. 
> Otherwise, why would they ever reduce 
> emissions? Personally I think that the only issue that matters is 
> overpopulation. As long as we have 
> seven billion people making billions more people, nothing will stop the 
> devaluation of they quality of human life, 
> and of human lives. Whether it's the threat of running out of oil, food, 
> water, or money, it doesn't really matter 
>  which comes first. It's like putting more and more fish in an overstocked 
> fish tank, the bigger ones just 
> eat more and more of the smaller ones while the whole thing fills up with 
> crap. 
>
> Craig 
>
>
>
>
> Roger Clough, rcl...@verizon.net  
> 9/11/2012   
> Leibniz would say, "If there's no God, we'd have to invent him   
> so that everything could function." 
> - Receiving the following content -   
> From: Craig Weinberg   
> Receiver: everything-list   
> Time: 2012-09-11, 00:40:08 
> Subject: Re: Re: Racism ? How's that implied ? 
>
>
> Hi Roger, 
>
> It's ok not to be obsessed with cleaning up the environment, but why be 
> intolerant of people who are? Same with people who spend a lot of time 
> talking in public about issues of racial discrimination. If you are going 
> to speak and act on behalf of millions of people who are not speaking and 
> acting, it is understandable that you might also be the type of person who 
> is strongly motivated. 
>
> What you don't seem to appreciate is that being able to not have to think 
> about race is a luxury that non-whites do not have. That doesn't mean you 
> have to make the world fair for everyone, but the least that we who have 
> that luxury could do is acknowledge that we have that privilege. Have you 
> ever considered what it would be like for you in a world with an alternate 
> history? Where the Cherokee Nation developed guns and steel before the 
> Europeans and colonized it using Siberian slaves instead? You could listen 
> to descendants of those invaders and slavers discuss how the whining of 
> pink people, their scapegoats and victims for centuries in a hostile land, 
> is really not their cup of tea.   
>
> Craig 
>
> On Monday, September 10, 2012 7:19:44 AM UTC-4, rclough wrote:   
> Hi Craig Weinberg   
>
> Not that I am against cleaning up the environment, but I am not 
> obsessed with the idea.  Integrating with Nature is also a main principle 
> of the Communist Manifesto.   
>
>
> Roger Clough, rcl...@verizon.net  
> 9/10/2012   
> Leibniz would say, "If there's no God, we'd have to invent him   
> so that everything could function." 
> --

Re: Re: Re: Re: Racism ? How's that implied ?

[Roger Clough]

Hi Craig Weinberg  

The fact is that the only incentive businesses look to is profit.
So demonizing profit doesn't do any good.
And urging them to hire workers doesn't work.


 Clough, rclo...@verizon.net 
9/13/2012  
Leibniz would say, "If there's no God, we'd have to invent him  
so that everything could function." 
- Receiving the following content -  
From: Craig Weinberg  
Receiver: everything-list  
Time: 2012-09-12, 20:03:27 
Subject: Re: Re: Re: Racism ? How's that implied ? 




On Tuesday, September 11, 2012 8:32:21 AM UTC-4, rclough wrote: 
Hi Craig Weinberg  

I am intolerant of stupidity and deception, particularly 
when the idea of carbon credits pops up. This suggests that   
"Global warming" is just a method of raising taxes, 
diminishing coal and oil,  and even globally sharing the wealth.  

Thankfully china won't go along with this stupidity. 
It all seems to be politics rather than science.  

I don't know enough about it to say too much about it. I think that the point 
is to make it political so

that the greatest polluters will have an incentive to pollute less. Otherwise, 
why would they ever reduce
emissions? Personally I think that the only issue that matters is 
overpopulation. As long as we have 
seven billion people making billions more people, nothing will stop the 
devaluation of they quality of human life, 
and of human lives. Whether it's the threat of running out of oil, food, water, 
or money, it doesn't really matter
 which comes first. It's like putting more and more fish in an overstocked fish 
tank, the bigger ones just 
eat more and more of the smaller ones while the whole thing fills up with crap. 

Craig 




Roger Clough, rclo...@verizon.net 
9/11/2012  
Leibniz would say, "If there's no God, we'd have to invent him  
so that everything could function." 
- Receiving the following content -  
From: Craig Weinberg  
Receiver: everything-list  
Time: 2012-09-11, 00:40:08 
Subject: Re: Re: Racism ? How's that implied ? 


Hi Roger, 

It's ok not to be obsessed with cleaning up the environment, but why be 
intolerant of people who are? Same with people who spend a lot of time talking 
in public about issues of racial discrimination. If you are going to speak and 
act on behalf of millions of people who are not speaking and acting, it is 
understandable that you might also be the type of person who is strongly 
motivated. 

What you don't seem to appreciate is that being able to not have to think about 
race is a luxury that non-whites do not have. That doesn't mean you have to 
make the world fair for everyone, but the least that we who have that luxury 
could do is acknowledge that we have that privilege. Have you ever considered 
what it would be like for you in a world with an alternate history? Where the 
Cherokee Nation developed guns and steel before the Europeans and colonized it 
using Siberian slaves instead? You could listen to descendants of those 
invaders and slavers discuss how the whining of pink people, their scapegoats 
and victims for centuries in a hostile land, is really not their cup of tea.  

Craig 

On Monday, September 10, 2012 7:19:44 AM UTC-4, rclough wrote:  
Hi Craig Weinberg  

Not that I am against cleaning up the environment, but I am not 
obsessed with the idea.  Integrating with Nature is also a main principle 
of the Communist Manifesto.  


Roger Clough, rclo...@verizon.net 
9/10/2012  
Leibniz would say, "If there's no God, we'd have to invent him  
so that everything could function." 
- Receiving the following content -  
From: Craig Weinberg  
Receiver: everything-list  
Time: 2012-09-09, 16:23:54 
Subject: Re: Racism ? How's that implied ? 




On Sunday, September 9, 2012 2:58:32 PM UTC-4, Stephen Paul King wrote:  
On 9/9/2012 2:21 PM, Craig Weinberg wrote: 

On Sunday, September 9, 2012 1:41:37 PM UTC-4, Stephen Paul King wrote:  
Hi Craig, 

Why are we even considering the thoughts of paranoids? Are they in control of 
our daily lives? 




Hi Stephen, 

I agree, I was responding to what Roger said about liberals: 

 "ironically and  paradoxically they see the world in terms of race.  
Conservatives attempt to live by facts. I never  
saw racism in what what I wrote until you brought  
the subject up." 

which sounded to me like 'conservatives aren't racist, liberals are', which - 
although conservative thought has some admirable virtues, I can say without 
hesitation that tolerance for racial and gender diversity is not one of them. 
That's why I brought up JBS and KKK, to show the absurdity of that claim, since 
the most racist hate groups are known to be political right wing extremists and 
not left wing extremists.  


HI Craig, 

The contest of recrimination is not winnable, but let's try for the sake of 
the discussion. 

Re: Re: Re: Racism ? How's that implied ?

[Craig Weinberg]

On Tuesday, September 11, 2012 8:32:21 AM UTC-4, rclough wrote:
>
>  Hi Craig Weinberg 
>  
> I am intolerant of stupidity and deception, particularly
> when the idea of carbon credits pops up. This suggests that  
> "Global warming" is just a method of raising taxes,
> diminishing coal and oil,  and even globally sharing the wealth. 
>  
> Thankfully china won't go along with this stupidity.
> It all seems to be politics rather than science. 
>

I don't know enough about it to say too much about it. I think that the 
point is to make it political so that the greatest polluters will have an 
incentive to pollute less. Otherwise, why would they ever reduce emissions? 
Personally I think that the only issue that matters is overpopulation. As 
long as we have seven billion people making billions more people, nothing 
will stop the devaluation of they quality of human life, and of human 
lives. Whether it's the threat of running out of oil, food, water, or 
money, it doesn't really matter which comes first. It's like putting more 
and more fish in an overstocked fish tank, the bigger ones just eat more 
and more of the smaller ones while the whole thing fills up with crap.

Craig

 
>  
> Roger Clough, rclo...@verizon.net 
> 9/11/2012 
> Leibniz would say, "If there's no God, we'd have to invent him 
> so that everything could function."
>
> - Receiving the following content - 
> *From:* Craig Weinberg  
> *Receiver:* everything-list  
> *Time:* 2012-09-11, 00:40:08
> *Subject:* Re: Re: Racism ? How's that implied ?
>
>  Hi Roger,
>
> It's ok not to be obsessed with cleaning up the environment, but why be 
> intolerant of people who are? Same with people who spend a lot of time 
> talking in public about issues of racial discrimination. If you are going 
> to speak and act on behalf of millions of people who are not speaking and 
> acting, it is understandable that you might also be the type of person who 
> is strongly motivated.
>
> What you don't seem to appreciate is that being able to not have to think 
> about race is a luxury that non-whites do not have. That doesn't mean you 
> have to make the world fair for everyone, but the least that we who have 
> that luxury could do is acknowledge that we have that privilege. Have you 
> ever considered what it would be like for you in a world with an alternate 
> history? Where the Cherokee Nation developed guns and steel before the 
> Europeans and colonized it using Siberian slaves instead? You could listen 
> to descendants of those invaders and slavers discuss how the whining of 
> pink people, their scapegoats and victims for centuries in a hostile land, 
> is really not their cup of tea. 
>
> Craig
>
> On Monday, September 10, 2012 7:19:44 AM UTC-4, rclough wrote: 
>>
>>  Hi Craig Weinberg 
>>  
>> Not that I am against cleaning up the environment, but I am not
>> obsessed with the idea.  Integrating with Nature is also a main principle
>> of the Communist Manifesto. 
>>  
>>  
>> Roger Clough, rclo...@verizon.net
>> 9/10/2012 
>> Leibniz would say, "If there's no God, we'd have to invent him 
>> so that everything could function."
>>
>> - Receiving the following content - 
>> *From:* Craig Weinberg 
>> *Receiver:* everything-list 
>> *Time:* 2012-09-09, 16:23:54
>> *Subject:* Re: Racism ? How's that implied ?
>>
>>  
>>
>> On Sunday, September 9, 2012 2:58:32 PM UTC-4, Stephen Paul King wrote: 
>>>
>>>  On 9/9/2012 2:21 PM, Craig Weinberg wrote:
>>>
>>> On Sunday, September 9, 2012 1:41:37 PM UTC-4, Stephen Paul King wrote: 
>>>>
>>>>  Hi Craig,
>>>>
>>>> Why are we even considering the thoughts of paranoids? Are they in 
>>>> control of our daily lives?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>> Hi Stephen,
>>>
>>> I agree, I was responding to what Roger said about liberals:
>>>
>>>  "ironically and  paradoxically they see the world in terms of race. 
>>> Conservatives attempt to live by facts. I never 
>>> saw racism in what what I wrote until you brought 
>>> the subject up."
>>>
>>> which sounded to me like 'conservatives aren't racist, liberals are', 
>>> which - although conservative thought has some admirable virtues, I can say 
>>> without hesitation that tolerance for racial and gender diversity is not 
>>> one of them. That's why I brought up JBS and KKK, to show the absurdity of 
>>> that claim, si

Re: Re: Re: Racism ? How's that implied ?

[Roger Clough]

Hi Craig Weinberg 

I am intolerant of stupidity and deception, particularly
when the idea of carbon credits pops up. This suggests that  
"Global warming" is just a method of raising taxes,
diminishing coal and oil,  and even globally sharing the wealth. 

Thankfully china won't go along with this stupidity.
It all seems to be politics rather than science. 


Roger Clough, rclo...@verizon.net
9/11/2012 
Leibniz would say, "If there's no God, we'd have to invent him 
so that everything could function."
- Receiving the following content - 
From: Craig Weinberg 
Receiver: everything-list 
Time: 2012-09-11, 00:40:08
Subject: Re: Re: Racism ? How's that implied ?


Hi Roger,

It's ok not to be obsessed with cleaning up the environment, but why be 
intolerant of people who are? Same with people who spend a lot of time talking 
in public about issues of racial discrimination. If you are going to speak and 
act on behalf of millions of people who are not speaking and acting, it is 
understandable that you might also be the type of person who is strongly 
motivated.

What you don't seem to appreciate is that being able to not have to think about 
race is a luxury that non-whites do not have. That doesn't mean you have to 
make the world fair for everyone, but the least that we who have that luxury 
could do is acknowledge that we have that privilege. Have you ever considered 
what it would be like for you in a world with an alternate history? Where the 
Cherokee Nation developed guns and steel before the Europeans and colonized it 
using Siberian slaves instead? You could listen to descendants of those 
invaders and slavers discuss how the whining of pink people, their scapegoats 
and victims for centuries in a hostile land, is really not their cup of tea. 

Craig

On Monday, September 10, 2012 7:19:44 AM UTC-4, rclough wrote:
Hi Craig Weinberg 

Not that I am against cleaning up the environment, but I am not
obsessed with the idea.  Integrating with Nature is also a main principle
of the Communist Manifesto. 


Roger Clough, rclo...@verizon.net
9/10/2012 
Leibniz would say, "If there's no God, we'd have to invent him 
so that everything could function."
- Receiving the following content - 
From: Craig Weinberg 
Receiver: everything-list 
Time: 2012-09-09, 16:23:54
Subject: Re: Racism ? How's that implied ?




On Sunday, September 9, 2012 2:58:32 PM UTC-4, Stephen Paul King wrote: 
On 9/9/2012 2:21 PM, Craig Weinberg wrote:

On Sunday, September 9, 2012 1:41:37 PM UTC-4, Stephen Paul King wrote: 
Hi Craig,

Why are we even considering the thoughts of paranoids? Are they in control of 
our daily lives?




Hi Stephen,

I agree, I was responding to what Roger said about liberals:

 "ironically and  paradoxically they see the world in terms of race. 
Conservatives attempt to live by facts. I never 
saw racism in what what I wrote until you brought 
the subject up."

which sounded to me like 'conservatives aren't racist, liberals are', which - 
although conservative thought has some admirable virtues, I can say without 
hesitation that tolerance for racial and gender diversity is not one of them. 
That's why I brought up JBS and KKK, to show the absurdity of that claim, since 
the most racist hate groups are known to be political right wing extremists and 
not left wing extremists. 


HI Craig,

The contest of recrimination is not winnable, but let's try for the sake of 
the discussion.



Personally I don't know of any left wing extremist groups in this country - not 
that there aren't any but even self-proclaimed anarchists seem to stay out of 
trouble.

I guess that you have never heard of 

1) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Earth_First! 

2) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Earth_Liberation_Front


I had heard of Earth First but not much. Yeah, I think it's fair to call them 
left wing eco-terrorists. Unfortunately the way they are going about it, using 
arson and destruction will only serve to discredit their cause and provide a 
ready excuse for stepping up surveillance and security operations around the 
world. I don't think that mainstream liberals are aware or support groups like 
this though generally. Contrary to the overwhelming drift to the right by 
conservatives, groups like these have not seemed to influence the politics of 
the mainstream (Democrats can't really even be called liberals, more like 
fiscal conservatives who are socially moderate).
 
3) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greenpeace


What do they do that is bad? Do they threaten innocent people? Maybe they are 
over-zealous and unrealistic about ecological priorities but it's a drop in the 
bucket compared to the global machine they are up against. From what I see it 
looks like they mainly are concerned with protecting human beings in general: 
http://yqyq.net/

Re: Racism ? How's that implied ?

[Stephen P. King]

On 9/11/2012 12:44 AM, Craig Weinberg wrote:

John,

Oh I agree, that statistics like that aren't reliable in a scientific 
sense, but I think it is worthwhile to put it in perspective. Having 
to take our shoes off in airports forever for no real reason is not a 
rational response to the actual threat of terrorism.


Craig
Surprisingly, it does give people the sense that "something is being 
done about it" and thus they acquiesce. Demented and Sad. 
 Humans are, sadly, herd 
animals.


--
Onward!

Stephen

http://webpages.charter.net/stephenk1/Outlaw/Outlaw.html

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.

Re: Re: Re: Racism ? How's that implied ?

[Craig Weinberg]

nted out - not all conservatives 
>> are racists, but clearly the overwhelming majority (perhaps all?) racists 
>> are conservative. There are no liberals in any hate groups.
>>  
>>  
>>>   
>>> A greater sin, IMHO is political correctness, supported by Al-qaeda,
>>> which is sending America down the toilet. If you don't see that,
>>> no amount of explaining on my part will enlighten you.
>>>
>>
>> Political correctness certainly can be irritating, but it is also 
>> important to protect groups who are vulnerable from threats that escalate 
>> violence. Anti-American/Anti-Western terrorism around the world is 
>> certainly a threat, but not really a significant one for American citizens. 
>> Certainly nothing on the order of the response, which has amounted to open 
>> surveillance and unrestrained powers of control over the population. There 
>> is a far, far greater chance of being struck by lightning than being 
>> affected by terrorism:
>>
>> "A companion 
>> piece<http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703481004574646963713065116.html>in
>>  the 
>> *Wall Street Journal* lays out the statistics. Since 2000, the odds of 
>> you dying as a result of a terrorist act aboard a commercial American 
>> airliner is 1 in 25 million. The odds of getting struck by lightning: 1 in 
>> 500,000." 
>> http://blogs.riverfronttimes.com/dailyrft/2010/01/odds_of_dying_in_terrorist_attack_on_airline_1_in_25_million_struck_by_lightning_1_in_50.php
>>
>> Political correctness has not frozen wages for 35 years. Political 
>> correctness has not outsourced millions of jobs. Political correctness 
>> doesn't evade paying taxes in offshore accounts and lobbying for tax cuts 
>> for the rich. It didn't deregulate the banking industry and make billions 
>> of dollars disappear into a few people's pockets. These are the things that 
>> threaten America. Political correctness? What? Rush Limbaugh is being 
>> hampered in his free expression by liberals? The threat has always been 
>> fascism - from the left or the right. Hate, not politeness. Brutality not 
>> sensitivity.
>>
>> As you say though, if you don't see that already, I can't make you see it.
>>
>> Craig
>>
>>
>>>  
>>> Roger Clough, rclo...@verizon.net
>>> 9/9/2012 
>>> Leibniz would say, "If there's no God, we'd have to invent him 
>>> so that everything could function."
>>>
>>>  - Receiving the following content - 
>>> *From:* Craig Weinberg 
>>> *Receiver:* everything-list 
>>> *Time:* 2012-09-08, 13:30:43
>>> *Subject:* Re: Re: Racism ? How's that implied ?
>>>
>>>   
>>>
>>> On Saturday, September 8, 2012 9:34:45 AM UTC-4, rclough wrote: 
>>>>
>>>>  because ironically and 
>>>> paradoxically they see the world in terms of race. 
>>>> Conservatives attempt to live by facts. I never 
>>>> saw racism in what what I wrote until you brought 
>>>> the subject up. 
>>>>
>>>
>>> Are you familiar with the KKK? The John Birch Society? Would you call 
>>> those liberal organizations? I don't want to get into a political flame 
>>> war, but just so you know, liberals do not see the world in terms of race, 
>>> but they are prejudiced against conservatives because they see them as 
>>> people who are unaware of their own ignorance of the facts and uncaring of 
>>> the consequences of that ignorance. Of course that may not be the case, but 
>>> any of the hundreds of millions of liberals who might read what you have 
>>> written there will interpret it in precisely that way.
>>>
>>> Personally, my theory is that people generally imitate or contradict the 
>>> political orientation of the first strongly political person they are 
>>> exposed to in their life. Usually a parent or older sibling - if they like 
>>> them, they see the political world through their eyes, if they dislike 
>>> them, they seek to prove themselves unlike them. It's really that simple. 
>>> Very few people research politics methodically and impartially and 
>>> formulate a set of opinions based on 'facts'.
>>>
>>> Craig
>>>
>>> Craig
>>>
>>> -- 
>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google 
>>> Groups "Everything List" group.
>>> To view this disc

Re: Re: Racism ? How's that implied ?

[Craig Weinberg]

Hi Roger,

It's ok not to be obsessed with cleaning up the environment, but why be 
intolerant of people who are? Same with people who spend a lot of time 
talking in public about issues of racial discrimination. If you are going 
to speak and act on behalf of millions of people who are not speaking and 
acting, it is understandable that you might also be the type of person who 
is strongly motivated.

What you don't seem to appreciate is that being able to not have to think 
about race is a luxury that non-whites do not have. That doesn't mean you 
have to make the world fair for everyone, but the least that we who have 
that luxury could do is acknowledge that we have that privilege. Have you 
ever considered what it would be like for you in a world with an alternate 
history? Where the Cherokee Nation developed guns and steel before the 
Europeans and colonized it using Siberian slaves instead? You could listen 
to descendants of those invaders and slavers discuss how the whining of 
pink people, their scapegoats and victims for centuries in a hostile land, 
is really not their cup of tea. 

Craig

On Monday, September 10, 2012 7:19:44 AM UTC-4, rclough wrote:
>
>  Hi Craig Weinberg 
>  
> Not that I am against cleaning up the environment, but I am not
> obsessed with the idea.  Integrating with Nature is also a main principle
> of the Communist Manifesto. 
>  
>  
> Roger Clough, rclo...@verizon.net 
> 9/10/2012 
> Leibniz would say, "If there's no God, we'd have to invent him 
> so that everything could function."
>
> - Receiving the following content - 
> *From:* Craig Weinberg  
> *Receiver:* everything-list  
> *Time:* 2012-09-09, 16:23:54
> *Subject:* Re: Racism ? How's that implied ?
>
>  
>
> On Sunday, September 9, 2012 2:58:32 PM UTC-4, Stephen Paul King wrote: 
>>
>>  On 9/9/2012 2:21 PM, Craig Weinberg wrote:
>>
>> On Sunday, September 9, 2012 1:41:37 PM UTC-4, Stephen Paul King wrote: 
>>>
>>>  Hi Craig,
>>>
>>> Why are we even considering the thoughts of paranoids? Are they in 
>>> control of our daily lives?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>> Hi Stephen,
>>
>> I agree, I was responding to what Roger said about liberals:
>>
>>  "ironically and  paradoxically they see the world in terms of race. 
>> Conservatives attempt to live by facts. I never 
>> saw racism in what what I wrote until you brought 
>> the subject up."
>>
>> which sounded to me like 'conservatives aren't racist, liberals are', 
>> which - although conservative thought has some admirable virtues, I can say 
>> without hesitation that tolerance for racial and gender diversity is not 
>> one of them. That's why I brought up JBS and KKK, to show the absurdity of 
>> that claim, since the most racist hate groups are known to be political 
>> right wing extremists and not left wing extremists. 
>>
>>
>> HI Craig,
>>
>> The contest of recrimination is not winnable, but let's try for the 
>> sake of the discussion.
>>
>>  
>> Personally I don't know of any left wing extremist groups in this country 
>> - not that there aren't any but even self-proclaimed anarchists seem to 
>> stay out of trouble.
>>
>>
>> I guess that you have never heard of 
>>
>> 1) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Earth_First! 
>>
>  2) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Earth_Liberation_Front
>>
>
> I had heard of Earth First but not much. Yeah, I think it's fair to call 
> them left wing eco-terrorists. Unfortunately the way they are going about 
> it, using arson and destruction will only serve to discredit their cause 
> and provide a ready excuse for stepping up surveillance and security 
> operations around the world. I don't think that mainstream liberals are 
> aware or support groups like this though generally. Contrary to the 
> overwhelming drift to the right by conservatives, groups like these have 
> not seemed to influence the politics of the mainstream (Democrats can't 
> really even be called liberals, more like fiscal conservatives who are 
> socially moderate).
>  
>
>> 3) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greenpeace
>>
>
> What do they do that is bad? Do they threaten innocent people? Maybe they 
> are over-zealous and unrealistic about ecological priorities but it's a 
> drop in the bucket compared to the global machine they are up against. From 
> what I see it looks like they mainly are concerned with protecting human 
> beings in general: 
> http://yqyq.net/81737-Istoriya_i_dostizheniya_Greenpeace.html 
>
> Certainly th

Re: Re: Re: Re: Racism ? How's that implied ?

[Roger Clough]

Hi Platonist Guitar Cowboy 

My objection to political correctness is based on freedom of speech
and particularly those who would forbid debate or criticism because the topic or
subject is "politically incorrect." 


Roger Clough, rclo...@verizon.net
9/10/2012 
Leibniz would say, "If there's no God, we'd have to invent him 
so that everything could function."
- Receiving the following content - 
From: Platonist Guitar Cowboy 
Receiver: everything-list 
Time: 2012-09-09, 09:33:41
Subject: Re: Re: Re: Racism ? How's that implied ?


I don't see sins, I merely prefer "wrongs" as in: not appropriate to 
circumstance, on which there is never a final ruling. Stauffenberg tried to 
murder Hitler; had he succeeded, would that be an example of "wrong" or 
"heroism" or some mixed bag, yet again?

As a cowboy, I meet both liberal and conservative, and I almost don't care 
anymore. The liberals generally lack a sense of accounting/economic limits, or 
a precise program to re-frame these to minimize shocks to transition towards 
something better, without endangering the economic livelihoods of millions of 
people, and conservatives rarely exhibit compassion/empathy or a willingness to 
dream of something better. 

Any conception of political correctness is rooted in discrimination between 
outside, prohibited behavior, and inside, politically correct behavior. The 
kind of thinking that persuades itself that it can clearly distinguish between 
right and wrong, sins and good, in a total, universal sense, is either 
performing a guru or... So in a sense, Roger, your enlightened perspective here 
IS the kind of thinking that conjures up/creates the political correctness 
problem it attacks.

?


On Sun, Sep 9, 2012 at 1:24 PM, Roger Clough  wrote:

Hi Craig Weinberg 
?
I really don't know much about the John Birch Society,
but googling it up, find that it was once falsely accused of being racist,
no doubt due to over-zealous liberal hatred of conservatism.
?
The KKK was very racist. As far as I know it's mostly dead. Good.
?
A greater sin, IMHO is political correctness, supported by Al-qaeda,
which is sending America down the toilet. If you don't see that,
no amount of explaining on my part will enlighten you.
?
?
Roger Clough, rclo...@verizon.net
9/9/2012 
Leibniz would say, "If there's no God, we'd have to invent him 
so that everything could function."
- Receiving the following content - 
From: Craig Weinberg 
Receiver: everything-list 
Time: 2012-09-08, 13:30:43
Subject: Re: Re: Racism ? How's that implied ?




On Saturday, September 8, 2012 9:34:45 AM UTC-4, rclough wrote: 
?ecause ironically and 
paradoxically they see the world in terms of race. 
Conservatives attempt to live by facts. I never 
saw racism in what what I wrote until you brought 
the subject up. 


Are you familiar with the KKK? The John Birch Society? Would you call those 
liberal organizations? I don't want to get into a political flame war, but just 
so you know, liberals do not see the world in terms of race, but they are 
prejudiced against conservatives because they see them as people who are 
unaware of their own ignorance of the facts and uncaring of the consequences of 
that ignorance. Of course that may not be the case, but any of the hundreds of 
millions of liberals who might read what you have written there will interpret 
it in precisely that way.

Personally, my theory is that people generally imitate or contradict the 
political orientation of the first strongly political person they are exposed 
to in their life. Usually a parent or older sibling - if they like them, they 
see the political world through their eyes, if they dislike them, they seek to 
prove themselves unlike them. It's really that simple. Very few people research 
politics methodically and impartially and formulate a set of opinions based on 
'facts'.

Craig

Craig

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/everything-list/-/VErj_ANZX8wJ.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.



-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To

Re: Re: Racism ? How's that implied ?

[Roger Clough]

Hi Craig Weinberg 

Not that I am against cleaning up the environment, but I am not
obsessed with the idea.  Integrating with Nature is also a main principle
of the Communist Manifesto. 


Roger Clough, rclo...@verizon.net
9/10/2012 
Leibniz would say, "If there's no God, we'd have to invent him 
so that everything could function."
- Receiving the following content - 
From: Craig Weinberg 
Receiver: everything-list 
Time: 2012-09-09, 16:23:54
Subject: Re: Racism ? How's that implied ?




On Sunday, September 9, 2012 2:58:32 PM UTC-4, Stephen Paul King wrote:
On 9/9/2012 2:21 PM, Craig Weinberg wrote:

On Sunday, September 9, 2012 1:41:37 PM UTC-4, Stephen Paul King wrote: 
Hi Craig,

Why are we even considering the thoughts of paranoids? Are they in control of 
our daily lives?




Hi Stephen,

I agree, I was responding to what Roger said about liberals:

 "ironically and  paradoxically they see the world in terms of race. 
Conservatives attempt to live by facts. I never 
saw racism in what what I wrote until you brought 
the subject up."

which sounded to me like 'conservatives aren't racist, liberals are', which - 
although conservative thought has some admirable virtues, I can say without 
hesitation that tolerance for racial and gender diversity is not one of them. 
That's why I brought up JBS and KKK, to show the absurdity of that claim, since 
the most racist hate groups are known to be political right wing extremists and 
not left wing extremists. 


HI Craig,

The contest of recrimination is not winnable, but let's try for the sake of 
the discussion.



Personally I don't know of any left wing extremist groups in this country - not 
that there aren't any but even self-proclaimed anarchists seem to stay out of 
trouble.

I guess that you have never heard of 

1) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Earth_First! 

2) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Earth_Liberation_Front


I had heard of Earth First but not much. Yeah, I think it's fair to call them 
left wing eco-terrorists. Unfortunately the way they are going about it, using 
arson and destruction will only serve to discredit their cause and provide a 
ready excuse for stepping up surveillance and security operations around the 
world. I don't think that mainstream liberals are aware or support groups like 
this though generally. Contrary to the overwhelming drift to the right by 
conservatives, groups like these have not seemed to influence the politics of 
the mainstream (Democrats can't really even be called liberals, more like 
fiscal conservatives who are socially moderate).
 
3) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greenpeace


What do they do that is bad? Do they threaten innocent people? Maybe they are 
over-zealous and unrealistic about ecological priorities but it's a drop in the 
bucket compared to the global machine they are up against. From what I see it 
looks like they mainly are concerned with protecting human beings in general: 
http://yqyq.net/81737-Istoriya_i_dostizheniya_Greenpeace.html 

Certainly they are not racists or bullies of innocent people.

 

4) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Students_for_a_Democratic_Society


SDS lasted from 1960-1969, so it hasn't been relevant for almost 50 years. I 
had a professor who was in SDS. Extremely nice and gentle guy. He said he had a 
metal plate in his skull from the FBI. His class was on revolutionary 
movements, talked about SDS, the IWW and labor unions. He seemed to have a 
mature and reasonable perspective on the 60s
 


need more?
 


sure. my point was about racism though. Are there any groups of white racists 
who are liberal? 





In other parts of the world, there are certainly left-wing violent extremists 
but I don't guess that they are racially motivated in particular (unless maybe 
the distribution of wealth and power falls along racial lines in their area). 
What are the left wing presences in the US? Farmers markets? Small 
organizations that try to help people get birth control or protect people from 
being poisoned by industry?


It might be helpful if you laid out for us the definition of the terms that 
you are using. What exactly is left-wing and right-wing?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Left-wing_politics
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Right-wing_politics 

Why can't we just get along?


The left wing are those who see themselves as being the people who want to just 
get along or, if politically active, oppose those who prevent us from getting 
along. Left wing means tolerance, which means a certain degree of intolerance 
of intolerance. That's where it gets dicey.

I'm not sure who the right wing thinks they are. Patriots? Grownups who don't 
like to see people get anything without paying a price? Not sure.






To my mind, while I can understand why liberals would be criticized as whiny, 
weak, and impractical, I think conservatives w

Re: Re: Racism ? How's that implied ?

[Roger Clough]

Hi Craig Weinberg 

Liberals aren't necessarily racists, but most are those obsessed with
racial issues, and a few even worse, the race-baiters.  If I criticise the 
president,
I am called a racist.  Not true by a long shot.

Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton are good examples of race-baiters.


Roger Clough, rclo...@verizon.net
9/10/2012 
Leibniz would say, "If there's no God, we'd have to invent him 
so that everything could function."
- Receiving the following content - 
From: Craig Weinberg 
Receiver: everything-list 
Time: 2012-09-09, 14:21:30
Subject: Re: Racism ? How's that implied ?


On Sunday, September 9, 2012 1:41:37 PM UTC-4, Stephen Paul King wrote:
Hi Craig,

Why are we even considering the thoughts of paranoids? Are they in control of 
our daily lives?




Hi Stephen,

I agree, I was responding to what Roger said about liberals:

 "ironically and  paradoxically they see the world in terms of race. 
Conservatives attempt to live by facts. I never 
saw racism in what what I wrote until you brought 
the subject up."

which sounded to me like 'conservatives aren't racist, liberals are', which - 
although conservative thought has some admirable virtues, I can say without 
hesitation that tolerance for racial and gender diversity is not one of them. 
That's why I brought up JBS and KKK, to show the absurdity of that claim, since 
the most racist hate groups are known to be political right wing extremists and 
not left wing extremists. 

Personally I don't know of any left wing extremist groups in this country - not 
that there aren't any but even self-proclaimed anarchists seem to stay out of 
trouble. In other parts of the world, there are certainly left-wing violent 
extremists but I don't guess that they are racially motivated in particular 
(unless maybe the distribution of wealth and power falls along racial lines in 
their area). What are the left wing presences in the US? Farmers markets? Small 
organizations that try to help people get birth control or protect people from 
being poisoned by industry?

To my mind, while I can understand why liberals would be criticized as whiny, 
weak, and impractical, I think conservatives who do not understand why they are 
criticized as racist, anti-intellectual bullies are in deep denial or just 
sheltered from other viewpoints.

Craig

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/everything-list/-/lM3is6k4vVUJ.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.

Re: Re: Re: Re: Racism ? How's that implied ?

[Roger Clough]

Hi Craig Weinberg 

Thanks. Then I don't support the John Birch Society.

Roger Clough, rclo...@verizon.net
9/10/2012 
Leibniz would say, "If there's no God, we'd have to invent him 
so that everything could function."
- Receiving the following content - 
From: Craig Weinberg 
Receiver: everything-list 
Time: 2012-09-09, 10:30:51
Subject: Re: Re: Re: Racism ? How's that implied ?




On Sunday, September 9, 2012 7:25:57 AM UTC-4, rclough wrote:
Hi Craig Weinberg 

I really don't know much about the John Birch Society,


"The John Birch Society has its roots in the 1950s when it opposed the U.S.? 
affirming the human rights principles of the United Nations. It was used as a 
grassroots corollary to McCarthyism, insisting that imagined Communists were 
standing behind every light pole, ready to end the world as we know it. It 
still sees itself as fighting Communism, as well as the New World Order 
(whatever that is!), big government, the Civil Rights Movement, feminism, 
wealth redistribution and more. You are not likely to hear the John Birch 
Society using epithets or spewing base language; its values are more carefully 
hidden behind flag-waving and obscure and irrelevant legal principles. Its 
words are cloaked in concern for the "direction of the nation."


John Birchers opposed the 1964 Civil Rights Act, saying it violates the Tenth 
Amendment to the United States Constitution and overstepped the rights of 
individual states to enact laws regarding civil rights. On its website, the 
John Birch Society complains that "President Obama - the man who got fawning 
media treatment for no reason, was elected with a thin resume and exalted 
without even being a king - has now been given the Noble Peace Prize." The John 
Birch Society also opposes health care reform, gun control, public schools and 
a host of other progressive causes.
The Right-wing "watch" group, Public Research Associates, notes: "(T)he Birch 
society pioneered the encoding of implicit cultural forms of ethnocentric White 
racism and Christian nationalist antisemitism rather than relying on the White 
supremacist biological determinism and open loathing of Jews that had typified 
the old right prior to WWII. Throughout its existence, however, the Society has 
promoted open homophobia and sexism."
Because it is more "libertarian" than openly racist, anti-Semitic and sexist, 
the John Birch Society is often not characterized as a hate group like the Ku 
Klux Klan or the Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR), at least as 
defined by the Southern Poverty Law Center. One way the John Birch Society 
escapes that designation is because it receives support from prominent 
politicians and elected officials. Birchers work hard to mask the anti-human 
rights beliefs that underlie their opinions." (from 
http://archive.truthout.org/topstories/112909ms1)



but googling it up, find that it was once falsely accused of being racist,
no doubt due to over-zealous liberal hatred of conservatism.

The KKK was very racist. As far as I know it's mostly dead. Good.

Huh? Hate groups are huge. The KKK is pretty small (about 100 chapters and 5000 
members from the estimate I just saw), but there are many more Aryan groups, 
growing fast. As has been pointed out - not all conservatives are racists, but 
clearly the overwhelming majority (perhaps all?) racists are conservative. 
There are no liberals in any hate groups.
 


A greater sin, IMHO is political correctness, supported by Al-qaeda,
which is sending America down the toilet. If you don't see that,
no amount of explaining on my part will enlighten you.

Political correctness certainly can be irritating, but it is also important to 
protect groups who are vulnerable from threats that escalate violence. 
Anti-American/Anti-Western terrorism around the world is certainly a threat, 
but not really a significant one for American citizens. Certainly nothing on 
the order of the response, which has amounted to open surveillance and 
unrestrained powers of control over the population. There is a far, far greater 
chance of being struck by lightning than being affected by terrorism:

"A companion piece in the Wall Street Journal lays out the statistics. Since 
2000, the odds of you dying as a result of a terrorist act aboard a commercial 
American airliner is 1 in 25 million. The odds of getting struck by lightning: 
1 in 500,000." 
http://blogs.riverfronttimes.com/dailyrft/2010/01/odds_of_dying_in_terrorist_attack_on_airline_1_in_25_million_struck_by_lightning_1_in_50.php

Political correctness has not frozen wages for 35 years. Political correctness 
has not outsourced millions of jobs. Political correctness doesn't evade paying 
taxes in offshore accounts and lobbying for tax cuts for the rich. It didn't 
deregulate the banking industry and make billions of dollars di

Re: Racism ? How's that implied ?

[Stephen P. King]

On 9/9/2012 4:23 PM, Craig Weinberg wrote:



On Sunday, September 9, 2012 2:58:32 PM UTC-4, Stephen Paul King wrote:

On 9/9/2012 2:21 PM, Craig Weinberg wrote:

On Sunday, September 9, 2012 1:41:37 PM UTC-4, Stephen Paul King
wrote:

Hi Craig,

��� Why are we even considering the thoughts of
paranoids? Are they in control of our daily lives?



Hi Stephen,

I agree, I was responding to what Roger said about liberals:

 "ironically and  paradoxically they see the world in terms of race.
Conservatives attempt to live by facts. I never
saw racism in what what I wrote until you brought
the subject up."

which sounded to me like 'conservatives aren't racist, liberals
are', which - although conservative thought has some admirable
virtues, I can say without hesitation that tolerance for racial
and gender diversity is not one of them. That's why I brought up
JBS and KKK, to show the absurdity of that claim, since the most
racist hate groups are known to be political right wing
extremists and not left wing extremists.


HI Craig,

The contest of recrimination is not winnable, but let's try
for the sake of the discussion.



Personally I don't know of any left wing extremist groups in this
country - not that there aren't any but even self-proclaimed
anarchists seem to stay out of trouble.


I guess that you have never heard of

1) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Earth_First!


2) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Earth_Liberation_Front



I had heard of Earth First but not much. Yeah, I think it's fair to 
call them left wing eco-terrorists. Unfortunately the way they are 
going about it, using arson and destruction will only serve to 
discredit their cause and provide a ready excuse for stepping up 
surveillance and security operations around the world. I don't think 
that mainstream liberals are aware or support groups like this though 
generally. Contrary to the overwhelming drift to the right by 
conservatives, groups like these have not seemed to influence the 
politics of the mainstream (Democrats can't really even be called 
liberals, more like fiscal conservatives who are socially moderate).


We could point out bomb-throwers that affiliate themselves to all 
political brands, but that does this tell us other that insanity is 
evenly distributed in the human population.




3) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greenpeace



What do they do that is bad? Do they threaten innocent people?


The crew of whaling ships might disagree with you, but again, my 
point is to defend Truth, not any political brand.


Maybe they are over-zealous and unrealistic about ecological 
priorities but it's a drop in the bucket compared to the global 
machine they are up against. From what I see it looks like they mainly 
are concerned with protecting human beings in general: 
http://yqyq.net/81737-Istoriya_i_dostizheniya_Greenpeace.html


Certainly they are not racists or bullies of innocent people.


Sure, but do they have the "legitimacy" of government agency behind 
them? I only worry about people that can do things to me or my family or 
any one with the stamp of authority. For example, if I take money from 
you by force we call it theft. If the government does the same thing, we 
call it "taxation"





4) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Students_for_a_Democratic_Society



SDS lasted from 1960-1969, so it hasn't been relevant for almost 50 
years. I had a professor who was in SDS. Extremely nice and gentle 
guy. He said he had a metal plate in his skull from the FBI. His class 
was on revolutionary movements, talked about SDS, the IWW and labor 
unions. He seemed to have a mature and reasonable perspective on the 60s


It is good to see that people can recover from the insanity of 
youth, but not all do. Some remain unrepentant and are actually involved 
in setting public policy today.





need more?


sure. my point was about racism though. Are there any groups of white 
racists who are liberal?


Do we have access to polling data from people that are in this 
group to tell us what political camp they associate themselves with? I 
have not seen any.






In other parts of the world, there are certainly left-wing
violent extremists but I don't guess that they are racially
motivated in particular (unless maybe the distribution of wealth
and power falls along racial lines in their area). What are the
left wing presences in the US? Farmers markets? Small
organizations that try to help people get birth control or
protect people from being poisoned by industry?


It might be helpful if you laid out for us the definition of
 

Re: Re: Re: Racism ? How's that implied ?

[John Mikes]

 the order of the response, which has amounted to open
> surveillance and unrestrained powers of control over the population. There
> is a far, far greater chance of being struck by lightning than being
> affected by terrorism:
>
> "A companion 
> piece<http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703481004574646963713065116.html>in
>  the
> *Wall Street Journal* lays out the statistics. Since 2000, the odds of
> you dying as a result of a terrorist act aboard a commercial American
> airliner is 1 in 25 million. The odds of getting struck by lightning: 1 in
> 500,000."
> http://blogs.riverfronttimes.com/dailyrft/2010/01/odds_of_dying_in_terrorist_attack_on_airline_1_in_25_million_struck_by_lightning_1_in_50.php
>
> Political correctness has not frozen wages for 35 years. Political
> correctness has not outsourced millions of jobs. Political correctness
> doesn't evade paying taxes in offshore accounts and lobbying for tax cuts
> for the rich. It didn't deregulate the banking industry and make billions
> of dollars disappear into a few people's pockets. These are the things that
> threaten America. Political correctness? What? Rush Limbaugh is being
> hampered in his free expression by liberals? The threat has always been
> fascism - from the left or the right. Hate, not politeness. Brutality not
> sensitivity.
>
> As you say though, if you don't see that already, I can't make you see it.
>
> Craig
>
>
>>
>> Roger Clough, rclo...@verizon.net
>> 9/9/2012
>> Leibniz would say, "If there's no God, we'd have to invent him
>> so that everything could function."
>>
>>  - Receiving the following content -
>> *From:* Craig Weinberg
>> *Receiver:* everything-list
>> *Time:* 2012-09-08, 13:30:43
>> *Subject:* Re: Re: Racism ? How's that implied ?
>>
>>
>>
>> On Saturday, September 8, 2012 9:34:45 AM UTC-4, rclough wrote:
>>>
>>>  because ironically and
>>> paradoxically they see the world in terms of race.
>>> Conservatives attempt to live by facts. I never
>>> saw racism in what what I wrote until you brought
>>> the subject up.
>>>
>>
>> Are you familiar with the KKK? The John Birch Society? Would you call
>> those liberal organizations? I don't want to get into a political flame
>> war, but just so you know, liberals do not see the world in terms of race,
>> but they are prejudiced against conservatives because they see them as
>> people who are unaware of their own ignorance of the facts and uncaring of
>> the consequences of that ignorance. Of course that may not be the case, but
>> any of the hundreds of millions of liberals who might read what you have
>> written there will interpret it in precisely that way.
>>
>> Personally, my theory is that people generally imitate or contradict the
>> political orientation of the first strongly political person they are
>> exposed to in their life. Usually a parent or older sibling - if they like
>> them, they see the political world through their eyes, if they dislike
>> them, they seek to prove themselves unlike them. It's really that simple.
>> Very few people research politics methodically and impartially and
>> formulate a set of opinions based on 'facts'.
>>
>> Craig
>>
>> Craig
>>
>> --
>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
>> "Everything List" group.
>> To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/**
>> msg/everything-list/-/VErj_**ANZX8wJ<https://groups.google.com/d/msg/everything-list/-/VErj_ANZX8wJ>
>> .
>> To post to this group, send email to everyth...@googlegroups.**com.
>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to everything-li...@**
>> googlegroups.com.
>>
>> For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/**
>> group/everything-list?hl=en<http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en>
>> .
>>
>>  --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "Everything List" group.
> To view this discussion on the web visit
> https://groups.google.com/d/msg/everything-list/-/CZH0mviPLMwJ.
>
> To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
> For more options, visit this group at
> http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.

Re: Racism ? How's that implied ?

[Craig Weinberg]

On Sunday, September 9, 2012 2:58:32 PM UTC-4, Stephen Paul King wrote:
>
>  On 9/9/2012 2:21 PM, Craig Weinberg wrote:
>  
> On Sunday, September 9, 2012 1:41:37 PM UTC-4, Stephen Paul King wrote: 
>>
>>  Hi Craig,
>>
>> ��� Why are we even considering the thoughts of paranoids? Are they 
>> in control of our daily lives?
>>
>>
>>   
> Hi Stephen,
>
> I agree, I was responding to what Roger said about liberals:
>
>  "ironically and  paradoxically they see the world in terms of race. 
> Conservatives attempt to live by facts. I never 
> saw racism in what what I wrote until you brought 
> the subject up."
>
> which sounded to me like 'conservatives aren't racist, liberals are', 
> which - although conservative thought has some admirable virtues, I can say 
> without hesitation that tolerance for racial and gender diversity is not 
> one of them. That's why I brought up JBS and KKK, to show the absurdity of 
> that claim, since the most racist hate groups are known to be political 
> right wing extremists and not left wing extremists. 
>  
>
> HI Craig,
>
> The contest of recrimination is not winnable, but let's try for the 
> sake of the discussion.
>
>  
> Personally I don't know of any left wing extremist groups in this country 
> - not that there aren't any but even self-proclaimed anarchists seem to 
> stay out of trouble.
>
>
> I guess that you have never heard of 
>
> 1) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Earth_First! 
>
2) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Earth_Liberation_Front
>

I had heard of Earth First but not much. Yeah, I think it's fair to call 
them left wing eco-terrorists. Unfortunately the way they are going about 
it, using arson and destruction will only serve to discredit their cause 
and provide a ready excuse for stepping up surveillance and security 
operations around the world. I don't think that mainstream liberals are 
aware or support groups like this though generally. Contrary to the 
overwhelming drift to the right by conservatives, groups like these have 
not seemed to influence the politics of the mainstream (Democrats can't 
really even be called liberals, more like fiscal conservatives who are 
socially moderate).
 

> 3) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greenpeace
>

What do they do that is bad? Do they threaten innocent people? Maybe they 
are over-zealous and unrealistic about ecological priorities but it's a 
drop in the bucket compared to the global machine they are up against. From 
what I see it looks like they mainly are concerned with protecting human 
beings in general: 
http://yqyq.net/81737-Istoriya_i_dostizheniya_Greenpeace.html 

Certainly they are not racists or bullies of innocent people.

 

> 4) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Students_for_a_Democratic_Society
>

SDS lasted from 1960-1969, so it hasn't been relevant for almost 50 years. 
I had a professor who was in SDS. Extremely nice and gentle guy. He said he 
had a metal plate in his skull from the FBI. His class was on revolutionary 
movements, talked about SDS, the IWW and labor unions. He seemed to have a 
mature and reasonable perspective on the 60s
 

>
> need more?
>  
>

sure. my point was about racism though. Are there any groups of white 
racists who are liberal? 


>
>  In other parts of the world, there are certainly left-wing violent 
> extremists but I don't guess that they are racially motivated in particular 
> (unless maybe the distribution of wealth and power falls along racial lines 
> in their area). What are the left wing presences in the US? Farmers 
> markets? Small organizations that try to help people get birth control or 
> protect people from being poisoned by industry?
>  
>
> It might be helpful if you laid out for us the definition of the terms 
> that you are using. What exactly is left-wing and right-wing?
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Left-wing_politics
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Right-wing_politics 
>
> Why can't we just get along?
>

The left wing are those who see themselves as being the people who want to 
just get along or, if politically active, oppose those who prevent us from 
getting along. Left wing means tolerance, which means a certain degree of 
intolerance of intolerance. That's where it gets dicey.

I'm not sure who the right wing thinks they are. Patriots? Grownups who 
don't like to see people get anything without paying a price? Not sure.



>  
> To my mind, while I can understand why liberals would be criticized as 
> whiny, weak, and impractical, I think conservatives who do not understand 
> why they are criticized as racist, anti-intellectual bullies are in deep 
> denial or just sheltered from other viewpoints.
>
> Craig
>  
>
> From my point of view we need objectivity.
>

I'm on board with that. 

Tell me why didn't trickle down economics work? Why did Bush's 8-year 
presidency end in such catastrophic failure? Why haven't the corps making 
record profits behaved as the 'job creators' they are supposed to be?

Craig
 

> -- 
> 

Re: Racism ? How's that implied ?

[Stephen P. King]

On 9/9/2012 2:21 PM, Craig Weinberg wrote:

On Sunday, September 9, 2012 1:41:37 PM UTC-4, Stephen Paul King wrote:

Hi Craig,

��� Why are we even considering the thoughts of paranoids?
Are they in control of our daily lives?



Hi Stephen,

I agree, I was responding to what Roger said about liberals:

 "ironically and paradoxically they see the world in terms of race.
Conservatives attempt to live by facts. I never
saw racism in what what I wrote until you brought
the subject up."

which sounded to me like 'conservatives aren't racist, liberals are', 
which - although conservative thought has some admirable virtues, I 
can say without hesitation that tolerance for racial and gender 
diversity is not one of them. That's why I brought up JBS and KKK, to 
show the absurdity of that claim, since the most racist hate groups 
are known to be political right wing extremists and not left wing 
extremists.


HI Craig,

The contest of recrimination is not winnable, but let's try for the 
sake of the discussion.




Personally I don't know of any left wing extremist groups in this 
country - not that there aren't any but even self-proclaimed 
anarchists seem to stay out of trouble.


I guess that you have never heard of

1) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Earth_First! 


2) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Earth_Liberation_Front
3) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greenpeace
4) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Students_for_a_Democratic_Society

need more?



In other parts of the world, there are certainly left-wing violent 
extremists but I don't guess that they are racially motivated in 
particular (unless maybe the distribution of wealth and power falls 
along racial lines in their area). What are the left wing presences in 
the US? Farmers markets? Small organizations that try to help people 
get birth control or protect people from being poisoned by industry?


It might be helpful if you laid out for us the definition of the 
terms that you are using. What exactly is left-wing and right-wing?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Left-wing_politics
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Right-wing_politics

Why can't we just get along?



To my mind, while I can understand why liberals would be criticized as 
whiny, weak, and impractical, I think conservatives who do not 
understand why they are criticized as racist, anti-intellectual 
bullies are in deep denial or just sheltered from other viewpoints.


Craig


From my point of view we need objectivity.

--
Onward!

Stephen

http://webpages.charter.net/stephenk1/Outlaw/Outlaw.html

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.

Re: Racism ? How's that implied ?

[Craig Weinberg]

On Sunday, September 9, 2012 1:41:37 PM UTC-4, Stephen Paul King wrote:
>
>  Hi Craig,
>
> ��� Why are we even considering the thoughts of paranoids? Are they 
> in control of our daily lives?
>
>
>
Hi Stephen,

I agree, I was responding to what Roger said about liberals:

 "ironically and  paradoxically they see the world in terms of race. 
Conservatives attempt to live by facts. I never 
saw racism in what what I wrote until you brought 
the subject up."

which sounded to me like 'conservatives aren't racist, liberals are', which 
- although conservative thought has some admirable virtues, I can say 
without hesitation that tolerance for racial and gender diversity is not 
one of them. That's why I brought up JBS and KKK, to show the absurdity of 
that claim, since the most racist hate groups are known to be political 
right wing extremists and not left wing extremists. 

Personally I don't know of any left wing extremist groups in this country - 
not that there aren't any but even self-proclaimed anarchists seem to stay 
out of trouble. In other parts of the world, there are certainly left-wing 
violent extremists but I don't guess that they are racially motivated in 
particular (unless maybe the distribution of wealth and power falls along 
racial lines in their area). What are the left wing presences in the US? 
Farmers markets? Small organizations that try to help people get birth 
control or protect people from being poisoned by industry?

To my mind, while I can understand why liberals would be criticized as 
whiny, weak, and impractical, I think conservatives who do not understand 
why they are criticized as racist, anti-intellectual bullies are in deep 
denial or just sheltered from other viewpoints.

Craig

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/everything-list/-/lM3is6k4vVUJ.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.

Re: Racism ? How's that implied ?

[Stephen P. King]

ttp://blogs.riverfronttimes.com/dailyrft/2010/01/odds_of_dying_in_terrorist_attack_on_airline_1_in_25_million_struck_by_lightning_1_in_50.php


Political correctness has not frozen wages for 35 years. Political 
correctness has not outsourced millions of jobs. Political correctness 
doesn't evade paying taxes in offshore accounts and lobbying for tax 
cuts for the rich. It didn't deregulate the banking industry and make 
billions of dollars disappear into a few people's pockets. These are 
the things that threaten America. Political correctness? What? Rush 
Limbaugh is being hampered in his free expression by liberals? The 
threat has always been fascism - from the left or the right. Hate, not 
politeness. Brutality not sensitivity.


As you say though, if you don't see that already, I can't make you see it.

Craig

Roger Clough, rclo...@verizon.net 
9/9/2012
Leibniz would say, "If there's no God, we'd have to invent him
so that everything could function."

    ----- Receiving the following content -
*From:* Craig Weinberg 
*Receiver:* everything-list 
*Time:* 2012-09-08, 13:30:43
*Subject:* Re: Re: Racism ? How's that implied ?



On Saturday, September 8, 2012 9:34:45 AM UTC-4, rclough wrote:

 because ironically and
paradoxically they see the world in terms of race.
Conservatives attempt to live by facts. I never
saw racism in what what I wrote until you brought
the subject up.


Are you familiar with the KKK? The John Birch Society? Would
you call those liberal organizations? I don't want to get into
a political flame war, but just so you know, liberals do not
see the world in terms of race, but they are prejudiced
against conservatives because they see them as people who are
unaware of their own ignorance of the facts and uncaring of
the consequences of that ignorance. Of course that may not be
the case, but any of the hundreds of millions of liberals who
might read what you have written there will interpret it in
precisely that way.

Personally, my theory is that people generally imitate or
contradict the political orientation of the first strongly
political person they are exposed to in their life. Usually a
parent or older sibling - if they like them, they see the
political world through their eyes, if they dislike them, they
seek to prove themselves unlike them. It's really that simple.
Very few people research politics methodically and impartially
and formulate a set of opinions based on 'facts'.

Craig



--
Onward!

Stephen

http://webpages.charter.net/stephenk1/Outlaw/Outlaw.html

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.

Re: Re: Re: Racism ? How's that implied ?

[Craig Weinberg]

000.php

Political correctness has not frozen wages for 35 years. Political 
correctness has not outsourced millions of jobs. Political correctness 
doesn't evade paying taxes in offshore accounts and lobbying for tax cuts 
for the rich. It didn't deregulate the banking industry and make billions 
of dollars disappear into a few people's pockets. These are the things that 
threaten America. Political correctness? What? Rush Limbaugh is being 
hampered in his free expression by liberals? The threat has always been 
fascism - from the left or the right. Hate, not politeness. Brutality not 
sensitivity.

As you say though, if you don't see that already, I can't make you see it.

Craig

 
>  
> Roger Clough, rclo...@verizon.net 
> 9/9/2012 
> Leibniz would say, "If there's no God, we'd have to invent him 
> so that everything could function."
>
> - Receiving the following content - 
> *From:* Craig Weinberg  
> *Receiver:* everything-list  
> *Time:* 2012-09-08, 13:30:43
> *Subject:* Re: Re: Racism ? How's that implied ?
>
>  
>
> On Saturday, September 8, 2012 9:34:45 AM UTC-4, rclough wrote: 
>>
>>  because ironically and 
>> paradoxically they see the world in terms of race. 
>> Conservatives attempt to live by facts. I never 
>> saw racism in what what I wrote until you brought 
>> the subject up. 
>>
>
> Are you familiar with the KKK? The John Birch Society? Would you call 
> those liberal organizations? I don't want to get into a political flame 
> war, but just so you know, liberals do not see the world in terms of race, 
> but they are prejudiced against conservatives because they see them as 
> people who are unaware of their own ignorance of the facts and uncaring of 
> the consequences of that ignorance. Of course that may not be the case, but 
> any of the hundreds of millions of liberals who might read what you have 
> written there will interpret it in precisely that way.
>
> Personally, my theory is that people generally imitate or contradict the 
> political orientation of the first strongly political person they are 
> exposed to in their life. Usually a parent or older sibling - if they like 
> them, they see the political world through their eyes, if they dislike 
> them, they seek to prove themselves unlike them. It's really that simple. 
> Very few people research politics methodically and impartially and 
> formulate a set of opinions based on 'facts'.
>
> Craig
>
> Craig
>
> -- 
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
> "Everything List" group.
> To view this discussion on the web visit 
> https://groups.google.com/d/msg/everything-list/-/VErj_ANZX8wJ.
> To post to this group, send email to everyth...@googlegroups.com
> .
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
> everything-li...@googlegroups.com .
> For more options, visit this group at 
> http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.
>
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/everything-list/-/CZH0mviPLMwJ.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.

Re: Re: Re: Racism ? How's that implied ?

[Platonist Guitar Cowboy]

I don't see sins, I merely prefer "wrongs" as in: not appropriate to
circumstance, on which there is never a final ruling. Stauffenberg tried to
murder Hitler; had he succeeded, would that be an example of "wrong" or
"heroism" or some mixed bag, yet again?

As a cowboy, I meet both liberal and conservative, and I almost don't care
anymore. The liberals generally lack a sense of accounting/economic limits,
or a precise program to re-frame these to minimize shocks to transition
towards something better, without endangering the economic livelihoods of
millions of people, and conservatives rarely exhibit compassion/empathy or
a willingness to dream of something better.

Any conception of political correctness is rooted in discrimination between
outside, prohibited behavior, and inside, politically correct behavior. The
kind of thinking that persuades itself that it can clearly distinguish
between right and wrong, sins and good, in a total, universal sense, is
either performing a guru or... So in a sense, Roger, your enlightened
perspective here IS the kind of thinking that conjures up/creates the
political correctness problem it attacks.



On Sun, Sep 9, 2012 at 1:24 PM, Roger Clough  wrote:

>  Hi Craig Weinberg
>
> I really don't know much about the John Birch Society,
> but googling it up, find that it was once falsely accused of being racist,
> no doubt due to over-zealous liberal hatred of conservatism.
>
> The KKK was very racist. As far as I know it's mostly dead. Good.
>
> A greater sin, IMHO is political correctness, supported by Al-qaeda,
> which is sending America down the toilet. If you don't see that,
> no amount of explaining on my part will enlighten you.
>
>
> Roger Clough, rclo...@verizon.net
> 9/9/2012
>  Leibniz would say, "If there's no God, we'd have to invent him
> so that everything could function."
>
> - Receiving the following content -----
> *From:* Craig Weinberg 
> *Receiver:* everything-list 
> *Time:* 2012-09-08, 13:30:43
> *Subject:* Re: Re: Racism ? How's that implied ?
>
>
>
> On Saturday, September 8, 2012 9:34:45 AM UTC-4, rclough wrote:
>>
>>  because ironically and
>> paradoxically they see the world in terms of race.
>> Conservatives attempt to live by facts. I never
>> saw racism in what what I wrote until you brought
>> the subject up.
>>
>
> Are you familiar with the KKK? The John Birch Society? Would you call
> those liberal organizations? I don't want to get into a political flame
> war, but just so you know, liberals do not see the world in terms of race,
> but they are prejudiced against conservatives because they see them as
> people who are unaware of their own ignorance of the facts and uncaring of
> the consequences of that ignorance. Of course that may not be the case, but
> any of the hundreds of millions of liberals who might read what you have
> written there will interpret it in precisely that way.
>
> Personally, my theory is that people generally imitate or contradict the
> political orientation of the first strongly political person they are
> exposed to in their life. Usually a parent or older sibling - if they like
> them, they see the political world through their eyes, if they dislike
> them, they seek to prove themselves unlike them. It's really that simple.
> Very few people research politics methodically and impartially and
> formulate a set of opinions based on 'facts'.
>
> Craig
>
> Craig
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "Everything List" group.
> To view this discussion on the web visit
> https://groups.google.com/d/msg/everything-list/-/VErj_ANZX8wJ.
> To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
> For more options, visit this group at
> http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.
>
>  --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "Everything List" group.
> To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
> For more options, visit this group at
> http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.

Re: Re: Re: Racism ? How's that implied ?

[Roger Clough]

Hi Craig Weinberg 

I really don't know much about the John Birch Society,
but googling it up, find that it was once falsely accused of being racist,
no doubt due to over-zealous liberal hatred of conservatism.

The KKK was very racist. As far as I know it's mostly dead. Good.

A greater sin, IMHO is political correctness, supported by Al-qaeda,
which is sending America down the toilet. If you don't see that,
no amount of explaining on my part will enlighten you.


Roger Clough, rclo...@verizon.net
9/9/2012 
Leibniz would say, "If there's no God, we'd have to invent him 
so that everything could function."
- Receiving the following content - 
From: Craig Weinberg 
Receiver: everything-list 
Time: 2012-09-08, 13:30:43
Subject: Re: Re: Racism ? How's that implied ?




On Saturday, September 8, 2012 9:34:45 AM UTC-4, rclough wrote:
 because ironically and 
paradoxically they see the world in terms of race. 
Conservatives attempt to live by facts. I never 
saw racism in what what I wrote until you brought 
the subject up. 


Are you familiar with the KKK? The John Birch Society? Would you call those 
liberal organizations? I don't want to get into a political flame war, but just 
so you know, liberals do not see the world in terms of race, but they are 
prejudiced against conservatives because they see them as people who are 
unaware of their own ignorance of the facts and uncaring of the consequences of 
that ignorance. Of course that may not be the case, but any of the hundreds of 
millions of liberals who might read what you have written there will interpret 
it in precisely that way.

Personally, my theory is that people generally imitate or contradict the 
political orientation of the first strongly political person they are exposed 
to in their life. Usually a parent or older sibling - if they like them, they 
see the political world through their eyes, if they dislike them, they seek to 
prove themselves unlike them. It's really that simple. Very few people research 
politics methodically and impartially and formulate a set of opinions based on 
'facts'.

Craig

Craig

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/everything-list/-/VErj_ANZX8wJ.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.

Re: Racism ? How's that implied ?

[Bruno Marchal]

On 08 Sep 2012, at 15:33, Roger Clough wrote:


Hi Bruno Marchal

OK, I see, you think I judge the abilities of people
by the color of their skin.  So you call me a racist.



I was thinking only you might judge someone by the constitution of its  
body.


You don't answer the question: "can your daughter marry a man which  
body is 100% machine?"





You might be a liberal, because ironically and
paradoxically they see the world in terms of race.
Conservatives attempt to live by facts. I never
saw racism in what what I wrote until you brought
the subject up.

I don't mean to offend you with this talk of politics.
Conservatives are not perfect either.


Sure. I tend to be rather conservative, in principle.

I think that today the liberal/conservative division makes no sense.  
The division is more bastards/ victim of bastards, like Romney and  
Obama against Ron Paul, Gary Johnson or Norman Solomon, or those who  
understand that the human rights apply to everybody and those who does  
not, or between the fear sellers and the constitutionalists.


The republicans betrayed themselves by not attacking Obama on the NDAA  
notes. Thanks to the existence of a many years long drug and food  
prohibition I am hardly astonished.


As long as prohibition continue, there are no politics, only well- 
disguised form of mafias, which are succeeding to get the whole  
financial system into hostage.  The individual human is in danger.


Bruno




Roger Clough, rclo...@verizon.net
9/8/2012
Leibniz would say, "If there's no God, we'd have to invent him
so that everything could function."
- Receiving the following content -
From: Bruno Marchal
Receiver: everything-list
Time: 2012-09-08, 04:46:38
Subject: Re: Racism ? How's that implied ?




On 07 Sep 2012, at 15:00, Roger Clough wrote:


Hi Bruno Marchal

Racism ? How's that implied ?


Do you accept that your daughter marry a man who has undergone an  
artificial brain transplant?








But I do agree that perception and Cs are
not understandable with materialistic concepts
at least as they are commonly used.
Instead they are what the mind can sense,


OK.




as a sixth sense.


Hmm...





The mind is similar to driving a car through
Platoville and watching the static events
in passing.


OK.


Bruno







Roger Clough, rclo...@verizon.net
9/7/2012
Leibniz would say, "If there's no God, we'd have to invent him
so that everything could function."
- Receiving the following content -
From: Bruno Marchal
Receiver: everything-list
Time: 2012-09-06, 14:12:37
Subject: Re: Sane2004 Step One




On 05 Sep 2012, at 18:12, Roger Clough wrote:



I don't think that life or mind or intelligence
can be teleported. Especially since nobody knows what
they are.

I also don't believe that you can download
the contents of somebody's brain.




This is just restating that you don't believe in comp.


OK, develop your theory, and predict something testable, and we will  
better understand what you mean.

If not it looks just  like a form of racism based on magic.


Bruno






Roger Clough, rclo...@verizon.net
9/5/2012
Leibniz would say, "If there's no God, we'd have to invent him
so that everything could function."
- Receiving the following content -
From: Bruno Marchal
Receiver: everything-list
Time: 2012-09-05, 11:04:53
Subject: Re: Sane2004 Step One


On 05 Sep 2012, at 06:14, meekerdb wrote:


On 9/4/2012 7:19 PM, Russell Standish wrote:

On Tue, Sep 04, 2012 at 06:48:58PM -0700, Craig Weinberg wrote:

I have problems with all three of the comp assumptions:

*yes, doctor*: This is really the sleight of hand that props up
the entire
thought experiment. If you agree that you are nothing but your  
brain

function and that your brain function can be replaced by the
functioning of
non-brain devices, then you have already agreed that human
individuality is
a universal commodity.

Calling it a sleight of hand is a bit rough. It is the meat of the
comp assumption, and spelling it out this way makes it very
explicit. Either you agree you can be copied (without feeling a
thing), or you don't. If you do, you must face up to the  
consequences

of the argument, if you don't, then you do not accept
computationalism, and the consequences of the UDA do not apply to
your
worldview.


I suppose I can be copied. But does it follow that I am just the
computations in my brain. It seems likely that I also require an
outside environment/world with which I interact in order to remain
conscious. Bruno passes this off by saying it's just a matter of
the level of substitution, perhaps your local environment or even
the whole galaxy must be replaced by a digital representation in
order to maintain your consciousness unchanged. But this bothers
me. Suppose it is the whole galaxy, or the whole observed
universe. Does it really mean anything then to say yo

Re: Re: Racism ? How's that implied ?

[Craig Weinberg]

On Saturday, September 8, 2012 9:34:45 AM UTC-4, rclough wrote:
>
>  because ironically and 
> paradoxically they see the world in terms of race. 
> Conservatives attempt to live by facts. I never 
> saw racism in what what I wrote until you brought 
> the subject up. 
>

Are you familiar with the KKK? The John Birch Society? Would you call those 
liberal organizations? I don't want to get into a political flame war, but 
just so you know, liberals do not see the world in terms of race, but they 
are prejudiced against conservatives because they see them as people who 
are unaware of their own ignorance of the facts and uncaring of the 
consequences of that ignorance. Of course that may not be the case, but any 
of the hundreds of millions of liberals who might read what you have 
written there will interpret it in precisely that way.

Personally, my theory is that people generally imitate or contradict the 
political orientation of the first strongly political person they are 
exposed to in their life. Usually a parent or older sibling - if they like 
them, they see the political world through their eyes, if they dislike 
them, they seek to prove themselves unlike them. It's really that simple. 
Very few people research politics methodically and impartially and 
formulate a set of opinions based on 'facts'.

Craig

Craig

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/everything-list/-/VErj_ANZX8wJ.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.

Re: Re: Racism ? How's that implied ?

[Roger Clough]

Hi Bruno Marchal  

OK, I see, you think I judge the abilities of people
by the color of their skin.  So you call me a racist.
 
You might be a liberal, because ironically and
paradoxically they see the world in terms of race.
Conservatives attempt to live by facts. I never
saw racism in what what I wrote until you brought
the subject up. 

I don't mean to offend you with this talk of politics.
Conservatives are not perfect either.


Roger Clough, rclo...@verizon.net 
9/8/2012  
Leibniz would say, "If there's no God, we'd have to invent him  
so that everything could function." 
- Receiving the following content -  
From: Bruno Marchal  
Receiver: everything-list  
Time: 2012-09-08, 04:46:38 
Subject: Re: Racism ? How's that implied ? 




On 07 Sep 2012, at 15:00, Roger Clough wrote: 


Hi Bruno Marchal  

Racism ? How's that implied ? 


Do you accept that your daughter marry a man who has undergone an artificial 
brain transplant? 







But I do agree that perception and Cs are  
not understandable with materialistic concepts 
at least as they are commonly used. 
Instead they are what the mind can sense, 


OK. 




as a sixth sense. 


Hmm... 





The mind is similar to driving a car through 
Platoville and watching the static events 
in passing. 


OK. 


Bruno 







Roger Clough, rclo...@verizon.net 
9/7/2012  
Leibniz would say, "If there's no God, we'd have to invent him  
so that everything could function." 
- Receiving the following content -  
From: Bruno Marchal  
Receiver: everything-list  
Time: 2012-09-06, 14:12:37 
Subject: Re: Sane2004 Step One 




On 05 Sep 2012, at 18:12, Roger Clough wrote: 



I don't think that life or mind or intelligence 
can be teleported. Especially since nobody knows what 
they are. 

I also don't believe that you can download 
the contents of somebody's brain. 




This is just restating that you don't believe in comp.  


OK, develop your theory, and predict something testable, and we will better 
understand what you mean. 
If not it looks just  like a form of racism based on magic. 


Bruno 






Roger Clough, rclo...@verizon.net 
9/5/2012  
Leibniz would say, "If there's no God, we'd have to invent him  
so that everything could function." 
- Receiving the following content -  
From: Bruno Marchal  
Receiver: everything-list  
Time: 2012-09-05, 11:04:53 
Subject: Re: Sane2004 Step One 


On 05 Sep 2012, at 06:14, meekerdb wrote: 

> On 9/4/2012 7:19 PM, Russell Standish wrote: 
>> On Tue, Sep 04, 2012 at 06:48:58PM -0700, Craig Weinberg wrote: 
>>> I have problems with all three of the comp assumptions: 
>>> 
>>> *yes, doctor*: This is really the sleight of hand that props up  
>>> the entire 
>>> thought experiment. If you agree that you are nothing but your brain 
>>> function and that your brain function can be replaced by the  
>>> functioning of 
>>> non-brain devices, then you have already agreed that human  
>>> individuality is 
>>> a universal commodity. 
>> Calling it a sleight of hand is a bit rough. It is the meat of the 
>> comp assumption, and spelling it out this way makes it very 
>> explicit. Either you agree you can be copied (without feeling a 
>> thing), or you don't. If you do, you must face up to the consequences 
>> of the argument, if you don't, then you do not accept 
>> computationalism, and the consequences of the UDA do not apply to  
>> your 
>> worldview. 
> 
> I suppose I can be copied. But does it follow that I am just the  
> computations in my brain. It seems likely that I also require an  
> outside environment/world with which I interact in order to remain  
> conscious. Bruno passes this off by saying it's just a matter of  
> the level of substitution, perhaps your local environment or even  
> the whole galaxy must be replaced by a digital representation in  
> order to maintain your consciousness unchanged. But this bothers  
> me. Suppose it is the whole galaxy, or the whole observed  
> universe. Does it really mean anything then to say your brain has  
> been replaced ALONG WITH EVERYTHING ELSE? It's just the assertion  
> that everything is computable. 

That's a good argument for saying that the level of substitution is  
not that low. But the reasoning would still go through, and we would  
lead to a unique computable universe. That is the only way to make a  
digital physics consistent (as I forget to say sometimes). Then you  
get a more complex "other mind problem", and something like David  
Nyman- Hoyle beam would be needed, and would need to be separate from  
the physical reality, making the big physical whole incomplete, etc.  
yes this bothers me too. Need

Re: Racism ? How's that implied ?

[Bruno Marchal]

On 07 Sep 2012, at 15:00, Roger Clough wrote:


Hi Bruno Marchal

Racism ? How's that implied ?


Do you accept that your daughter marry a man who has undergone an  
artificial brain transplant?






But I do agree that perception and Cs are
not understandable with materialistic concepts
at least as they are commonly used.
Instead they are what the mind can sense,


OK.



as a sixth sense.


Hmm...




The mind is similar to driving a car through
Platoville and watching the static events
in passing.


OK.

Bruno






Roger Clough, rclo...@verizon.net
9/7/2012
Leibniz would say, "If there's no God, we'd have to invent him
so that everything could function."
- Receiving the following content -
From: Bruno Marchal
Receiver: everything-list
Time: 2012-09-06, 14:12:37
Subject: Re: Sane2004 Step One


On 05 Sep 2012, at 18:12, Roger Clough wrote:



I don't think that life or mind or intelligence
can be teleported. Especially since nobody knows what
they are.

I also don't believe that you can download
the contents of somebody's brain.



This is just restating that you don't believe in comp.

OK, develop your theory, and predict something testable, and we will  
better understand what you mean.

If not it looks just  like a form of racism based on magic.

Bruno





Roger Clough, rclo...@verizon.net
9/5/2012
Leibniz would say, "If there's no God, we'd have to invent him
so that everything could function."
- Receiving the following content -
From: Bruno Marchal
Receiver: everything-list
Time: 2012-09-05, 11:04:53
Subject: Re: Sane2004 Step One

On 05 Sep 2012, at 06:14, meekerdb wrote:

> On 9/4/2012 7:19 PM, Russell Standish wrote:
>> On Tue, Sep 04, 2012 at 06:48:58PM -0700, Craig Weinberg wrote:
>>> I have problems with all three of the comp assumptions:
>>>
>>> *yes, doctor*: This is really the sleight of hand that props up
>>> the entire
>>> thought experiment. If you agree that you are nothing but your  
brain

>>> function and that your brain function can be replaced by the
>>> functioning of
>>> non-brain devices, then you have already agreed that human
>>> individuality is
>>> a universal commodity.
>> Calling it a sleight of hand is a bit rough. It is the meat of the
>> comp assumption, and spelling it out this way makes it very
>> explicit. Either you agree you can be copied (without feeling a
>> thing), or you don't. If you do, you must face up to the  
consequences

>> of the argument, if you don't, then you do not accept
>> computationalism, and the consequences of the UDA do not apply to
>> your
>> worldview.
>
> I suppose I can be copied. But does it follow that I am just the
> computations in my brain. It seems likely that I also require an
> outside environment/world with which I interact in order to remain
> conscious. Bruno passes this off by saying it's just a matter of
> the level of substitution, perhaps your local environment or even
> the whole galaxy must be replaced by a digital representation in
> order to maintain your consciousness unchanged. But this bothers
> me. Suppose it is the whole galaxy, or the whole observed
> universe. Does it really mean anything then to say your brain has
> been replaced ALONG WITH EVERYTHING ELSE? It's just the assertion
> that everything is computable.

That's a good argument for saying that the level of substitution is
not that low. But the reasoning would still go through, and we would
lead to a unique computable universe. That is the only way to make a
digital physics consistent (as I forget to say sometimes). Then you
get a more complex "other mind problem", and something like David
Nyman- Hoyle beam would be needed, and would need to be separate from
the physical reality, making the big physical whole incomplete, etc.
yes this bothers me too. Needless to say, I tend to believe that if
comp is true, the level is much higher.



>
>>
>>> *Church thesis*: Views computation in isolation, irrespective of
>>> resources,
>>> supervenience on object-formed computing elements, etc. This is a
>>> theoretical theory of computation, completely divorced from
>>> realism from
>>> the start. What is it that does the computing? How and why does
>>> data enter
>>> or exit a computation?
>> It is necessarily an abstract mathematical thesis. The latter two
>> questions simply are relevant.
>>
>>> *Arithmetical Realism*: The idea that truth values are self
>>> justifying
>>> independently of subjectivity or physics is literally a shot in
>>> the dark.
>>> Like yes, doctor, this is really swallowing the cow whole from  
the

Racism ? How's that implied ?

[Roger Clough]

Hi Bruno Marchal 

Racism ? How's that implied ?

But I do agree that perception and Cs are 
not understandable with materialistic concepts
at least as they are commonly used.
Instead they are what the mind can sense,
as a sixth sense.

The mind is similar to driving a car through
Platoville and watching the static events
in passing.



Roger Clough, rclo...@verizon.net
9/7/2012 
Leibniz would say, "If there's no God, we'd have to invent him 
so that everything could function."
- Receiving the following content - 
From: Bruno Marchal 
Receiver: everything-list 
Time: 2012-09-06, 14:12:37
Subject: Re: Sane2004 Step One




On 05 Sep 2012, at 18:12, Roger Clough wrote:



I don't think that life or mind or intelligence
can be teleported. Especially since nobody knows what
they are.

I also don't believe that you can download
the contents of somebody's brain.




This is just restating that you don't believe in comp. 


OK, develop your theory, and predict something testable, and we will better 
understand what you mean.
If not it looks just  like a form of racism based on magic.


Bruno






Roger Clough, rclo...@verizon.net
9/5/2012 
Leibniz would say, "If there's no God, we'd have to invent him 
so that everything could function."
- Receiving the following content - 
From: Bruno Marchal 
Receiver: everything-list 
Time: 2012-09-05, 11:04:53
Subject: Re: Sane2004 Step One


On 05 Sep 2012, at 06:14, meekerdb wrote:

> On 9/4/2012 7:19 PM, Russell Standish wrote:
>> On Tue, Sep 04, 2012 at 06:48:58PM -0700, Craig Weinberg wrote:
>>> I have problems with all three of the comp assumptions:
>>>
>>> *yes, doctor*: This is really the sleight of hand that props up 
>>> the entire
>>> thought experiment. If you agree that you are nothing but your brain
>>> function and that your brain function can be replaced by the 
>>> functioning of
>>> non-brain devices, then you have already agreed that human 
>>> individuality is
>>> a universal commodity.
>> Calling it a sleight of hand is a bit rough. It is the meat of the
>> comp assumption, and spelling it out this way makes it very
>> explicit. Either you agree you can be copied (without feeling a
>> thing), or you don't. If you do, you must face up to the consequences
>> of the argument, if you don't, then you do not accept
>> computationalism, and the consequences of the UDA do not apply to 
>> your
>> worldview.
>
> I suppose I can be copied. But does it follow that I am just the 
> computations in my brain. It seems likely that I also require an 
> outside environment/world with which I interact in order to remain 
> conscious. Bruno passes this off by saying it's just a matter of 
> the level of substitution, perhaps your local environment or even 
> the whole galaxy must be replaced by a digital representation in 
> order to maintain your consciousness unchanged. But this bothers 
> me. Suppose it is the whole galaxy, or the whole observed 
> universe. Does it really mean anything then to say your brain has 
> been replaced ALONG WITH EVERYTHING ELSE? It's just the assertion 
> that everything is computable.

That's a good argument for saying that the level of substitution is 
not that low. But the reasoning would still go through, and we would 
lead to a unique computable universe. That is the only way to make a 
digital physics consistent (as I forget to say sometimes). Then you 
get a more complex "other mind problem", and something like David 
Nyman- Hoyle beam would be needed, and would need to be separate from 
the physical reality, making the big physical whole incomplete, etc. 
yes this bothers me too. Needless to say, I tend to believe that if 
comp is true, the level is much higher.



>
>>
>>> *Church thesis*: Views computation in isolation, irrespective of 
>>> resources,
>>> supervenience on object-formed computing elements, etc. This is a
>>> theoretical theory of computation, completely divorced from 
>>> realism from
>>> the start. What is it that does the computing? How and why does 
>>> data enter
>>> or exit a computation?
>> It is necessarily an abstract mathematical thesis. The latter two
>> questions simply are relevant.
>>
>>> *Arithmetical Realism*: The idea that truth values are self 
>>> justifying
>>> independently of subjectivity or physics is literally a shot in 
>>> the dark.
>>> Like yes, doctor, this is really swallowing the cow whole from the
>>> beginning and saying that the internal consistency of arithmetic
>>> constitutes universal supremacy without any real indication o