Re: Life in the Islamic State for women
On 15 April 2015 at 00:11, Samiya Illias samiyaill...@gmail.com wrote: John, here is a grammatical explanation of why God is referred to as He: Why Does the Quran Refer to Allah as “He”? by Nouman Ali Khan https://www.facebook.com/video.php?v=626545717478174set=vb.185523868247030type=2theater I don't often have time to watch videos. Would it be possible to summarise the argument? -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Re: Life in the Islamic State for women
On 15 April 2015 at 00:11, Samiya Illias samiyaill...@gmail.com wrote: A real messenger/prophet/interpreter does not ask for any personal benefit or remuneration. The pretenders seek worldly benefits. Surely just being viewed as the head of a religion - a true prophet - IS a worldly benefit? Even in the (probably unlikely) event that it doesn't being any personal material benefit, it still brings huge psychological benefits to the right sort of person. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Re: Life in the Islamic State for women
On 4/15/2015 5:15 PM, LizR wrote: On 15 April 2015 at 00:11, Samiya Illias samiyaill...@gmail.com mailto:samiyaill...@gmail.com wrote: A real messenger/prophet/interpreter does not ask for any personal benefit or remuneration. The pretenders seek worldly benefits. Surely just being viewed as the head of a religion - a true prophet - IS a worldly benefit? Even in the (probably unlikely) event that it doesn't being any personal material benefit, it still brings huge psychological benefits to the right sort of person. And what use is remuneration if you can command thousands and have anything (and anyone) you want just by saying it's Allah's will? Brent -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Re: Life in the Islamic State for women
John, here is a grammatical explanation of why God is referred to as He: Why Does the Quran Refer to Allah as “He”? by Nouman Ali Khan https://www.facebook.com/video.php?v=626545717478174set=vb.185523868247030type=2theater Samiya On Wed, Apr 8, 2015 at 12:05 PM, Samiya Illias samiyaill...@gmail.com wrote: John, please see my answers below your questions. On Wed, Apr 8, 2015 at 1:08 AM, John Mikes jami...@gmail.com wrote: Samiya, please allow me one (two?) little questions: -- How can you tell a 'real' interpreter of God's words from a pretender? -- and I do not only refer to the 'publication' of the entire Script, there may be VAST differences between practical interpretations of the rightfully published details, whatever is included in the authentic total. (Look at e.g. the political variations as 'religious' prescriptions, law systems, state-formats, stuff to learn about the world etc.) A real messenger/prophet/interpreter does not ask for any personal benefit or remuneration. The pretenders seek worldly benefits. Following are quotes from the preachings of some messengers: Quoting Messenger Noah: http://quran.com/26/109 Sahih International And I do not ask you for it any payment. My payment is only from the Lord of the worlds. Quoting Messenger Hud: http://quran.com/26/127 Sahih International And I do not ask you for it any payment. My payment is only from the Lord of the worlds. Quoting Messenger Saleh: http://quran.com/26/145 Sahih International And I do not ask you for it any payment. My payment is only from the Lord of the worlds. Quoting Messenger Lot: http://quran.com/26/164 Sahih International And I do not ask you for it any payment. My payment is only from the Lord of the worlds. Quoting Messenger Shu'ayb: http://quran.com/26/180 Sahih International And I do not ask you for it any payment. My payment is only from the Lord of the worlds. --Is there a reson to call HIM and not HER? 1) We believe that God is above gender, but since God is referred to in the Quran with the masculine pronouns, so we follow the Quran's preference of pronouns for God. 2) Though http://quran.com/4/1 states that we should revere the wombs, but it clarifies in other places that worship is only for the ONLY God and that the worship of female deities Satan-worship http://quran.com/4/117 . http://quran.com/4/1 Sahih International O mankind, fear your Lord, who created you from one soul and created from it its mate and dispersed from both of them many men and women. And fear Allah , through whom you ask one another, and the wombs. Indeed Allah is ever, over you, an Observer. http://quran.com/4/116-120 Sahih International Indeed, Allah does not forgive association with Him, but He forgives what is less than that for whom He wills. And he who associates others with Allah has certainly gone far astray. They call upon instead of Him none but female [deities], and they [actually] call upon none but a rebellious Satan. Whom Allah has cursed. For he had said, I will surely take from among Your servants a specific portion. And I will mislead them, and I will arouse in them [sinful] desires, and I will command them so they will slit the ears of cattle, and I will command them so they will change the creation of Allah . And whoever takes Satan as an ally instead of Allah has certainly sustained a clear loss. Satan promises them and arouses desire in them. But Satan does not promise them except delusion. As I learned (from you), there is no gender differentiation in Heavens, what I found VERY emlightening. Note: The Quran uses the term Heaven(s) [sama; pl:samawat] for sky/space/cosmos. For the Hereafter, though the Heaven(s) and Earth will be recreated, the term for the place of reward is Garden(s) [jannat], and the term for the place of punishment is Fire [naar]. I speculate, but I do not know if there will or will not be any gender differentiation in the Hereafter. Following is the basis of my speculation: 1) Human male and female pair has been created from a single entity [ http://signsandscience.blogspot.com/2014/12/the-first-humans.html ]. http://quran.com/4/1 Sahih International O mankind, fear your Lord, who created you from one soul and created from it its mate and dispersed from both of them many men and women. And fear Allah , through whom you ask one another, and the wombs. Indeed Allah is ever, over you, an Observer. http://quran.com/6/98 Sahih International And it is He who produced you from one soul and [gave you] a place of dwelling and of storage. We have detailed the signs for a people who understand. http://quran.com/7/189 Sahih International It is He who created you from one soul and created from it its mate that he might dwell in security with her. And when he covers her, she carries a light burden and continues therein. And when it becomes heavy, they both invoke Allah , their Lord, If You should give us a good [child],
Re: Life in the Islamic State for women
Liz: UK, or Sweden? Not only have they the different tempers - (Italians would 'react' differently) but try to be a pauper in Britain, or Sweden yourself and 'love' the system. (English story: Girly asks - 'Mummy, why is that gentleman lying on the curb?' Mummy: ' Honey, do not get involved in affairs of strangers'.) Or look at any part of the world - except those authoritarian/religious parts that 'keep' you happy with a fable of an afterlife-happiness . Reply to Aneurin Bevan: with SMALL financial benefits and the STUPIDITY of the poverty-stricken offspring* majority*. (Offspring I say, because that is the generaation that did not get sufficient education. Or enough books to read.)... In defense of the US aristocracy the media wrote: they get better food and education in early childhood, so their leadership will be supported by better brainwork. They sure have their place in governing the countries. So all you need is a grandpa who did the killing and acquired wealth. *Nonsense! * Wealth does not assure superb genetics, not corporally, not mentally. Money may try to hide the deficiencies but it does not impart talents. Nor do tutors or big jobs. JM On Sun, Apr 12, 2015 at 6:38 PM, LizR lizj...@gmail.com wrote: Here you go. http://readersupportednews.org/opinion2/277-75/29581-heinous-waste-of-money-officially-begins I'm not in favour of socialism as practiced by Stalin etc, of course, which was actually totalitarianism - but I am in favour of it as practiced in the UK (the NHS etc) - or Sweden, for example - if high taxes are used to fund agreed-upon pub lic goods, infrastructure, education, hospitals and welfare, if the greatest rich-poor gap isn't allowed to become obscene, then fine. I'm happy to have the blend of capitalism and socialism that works, but not one that has been hijacked by the ultra-rich. In the USA it appears there is no longer a democracy, for example, because they have FPTP elections with a two-party state, both sides of which have been bought up. Is there a cap on election spending? Does all election income have to be declared? Somehow I doubt it. Hence the ultra rich fund their party to make them even ultra-richer. The same is happening in other countries, of course. I would suspect a conspiracy started in the 80s but I don't know if they're that well organised. Though then again, why not? How can wealth persuade poverty to use its political freedom to keep wealth in power? -- Aneurin Bevan It appears they no longer need to. Expect the face of big brother to be revealed as, not Stalin after all, but Mr Monopoly. On 13 April 2015 at 09:03, spudboy100 via Everything List everything-list@googlegroups.com wrote: I don't disagree, especially when in the US, the billionaires run everything. Good if they chose wisely, Bad if they don't or decide not to. Like Indiana Jones and the Jesus Chalice or whatever it was called. Choose wisely said the 800 year old Knight. My original point was that Liz was basically saying things have devolved under capitalism, the environment, wars, and I was refocusing on what she left out, regarding the glories of socialism. If one is going to blast, at least blast fairly. This is basically what I call the Wattenberg method, after the government studies professor who asked, Compared to what and compared to when? Also, there are no protests or disruptions from the rule of the rich, nowadays. It's not like the serfs have run into the streets and overturned busses, or lighting trash fires, blocking highways, etc. Therefore, we must be ok with all this rule by the rich? Your friends at Davos are hopefully, wiser, than the politicians they own, because right now things seem to be getting unpleasant internationally now. -Original Message- From: Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be To: everything-list everything-list@googlegroups.com Sent: Sun, Apr 12, 2015 5:38 am Subject: Re: Life in the Islamic State for women On 10 Apr 2015, at 13:34, spudboy100 via Everything List wrote: The year is 2015. Is half the world enslaved now? If so, the violence in the world isn't being aimed at capitalists with top hats, suits, monocles, and cigarette holders. If you wish to speak of what the Belgians did in the Congo, 120 years ago, I will heartily agree. You are also ignoring the damage done to the environment by the communists in the USSR and the PRC. Socialism killed the Aral Sea, not capitalism, It was socialism that caused Chernobyl not Capitalism, and the Soviet radioactive materials fires in Kyrgyzstan. Counterpoint! It was capitalism that produced Fukushima by building a reactor too close to the sea. But capitalists are forced to react against an exorcised public, and communists just mow them down. -Original Message- From: LizR lizj...@gmail.com To: everything-list everything-list@googlegroups.com Sent: Thu, Apr 9, 2015 8:50 pm Subject: Re: Life in the Islamic State for women
Re: Life in the Islamic State for women
On 13 April 2015 at 15:35, John Clark johnkcl...@gmail.com wrote: On Sun, Apr 5, 2015 John Mikes jami...@gmail.com wrote: I never dreamed of wealthy people giving up their wealth. Not to general welfare, not to any other worthy goal. Andrew Carnegie gave away most of his money, and Bill Gates has already given away more money than anyone in human history, most of to the third world. Bill Gates has saved many orders of magnitude more people than Mother Teresa ever did. And Sam Walton did more good for humanity than Mother Teresa and Al Gore put together. The Ebeneezer Scrooge theory of economics still has legs! -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Re: Life in the Islamic State for women
On Mon, Apr 13, 2015 LizR lizj...@gmail.com wrote: Andrew Carnegie gave away most of his money, and Bill Gates has already given away more money than anyone in human history, most of to the third world. Bill Gates has saved many orders of magnitude more people than Mother Teresa ever did. And Sam Walton did more good for humanity than Mother Teresa and Al Gore put together. The Ebeneezer Scrooge theory of economics still has legs! Mother Teresa has far more in common with Ebeneezer Scrooge than Bill Gates or Sam Walton did. Christopher Hitchens made a video about Mother Teresa, this is part one of 3: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9WQ0i3nCx60 John K Clark -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Re: Life in the Islamic State for women
The point is, a democracy should be organised in such a way that it can't be turned into a plutocracy. A limited amount of money allowed for campaign funding is one such method (proportional representation is another, imho, to some extent). I suspect the people who wrote the US constitution would agree with me on this one. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Re: Life in the Islamic State for women
On Sun, Apr 5, 2015 John Mikes jami...@gmail.com wrote: I never dreamed of wealthy people giving up their wealth. Not to general welfare, not to any other worthy goal. Andrew Carnegie gave away most of his money, and Bill Gates has already given away more money than anyone in human history, most of to the third world. Bill Gates has saved many orders of magnitude more people than Mother Teresa ever did. And Sam Walton did more good for humanity than Mother Teresa and Al Gore put together. A NEW SYSTEM has to be established, definitely on NEW TERMS, the question is: W H O can make it and W H O can estblish it? More to the point who is going to physically enforce it? Who is going to run the goon squad? Not anyone from our rotten slave-driving capital/politico establishment. In the USA during the 19th century there was a mass migration of the most oppressed, slaves, from the slave states to the free states, but during the 20th century the mass migration was from the workers paradise communist states to the slave capitalistic states. Don't you find that odd, do you think that maybe just maybe there might be something wrong with your world view? And if things are so rotten why is everybody richer healthier and better educated now than any other era in world history? And capitalism may be inferior to a system where all the leaders are brilliant saints, but it's a little hard to find enough people like that to rule the world. What if 'people' cannot be pesuaded to 'vote' against their interest? if those millions turn out to be worthless? if - horribile dictu - VOTERS start to T H I N K For starters: when there will be a NON vote? (better: NO WAY vote). Elections are dumb, the free market works much better. Hence my search for someone smarter than me. Nobody is smart enough to have a deep understanding of the world's economy because being the product of of 7 billion minds it's the most complex thing know, and that's what makes capitalism so good, it will never find the perfect solution to a economic problem but it will always find a good one. John K Clark -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Re: Life in the Islamic State for women
Here you go. http://readersupportednews.org/opinion2/277-75/29581-heinous-waste-of-money-officially-begins I'm not in favour of socialism as practiced by Stalin etc, of course, which was actually totalitarianism - but I am in favour of it as practiced in the UK (the NHS etc) - or Sweden, for example - if high taxes are used to fund agreed-upon pub lic goods, infrastructure, education, hospitals and welfare, if the greatest rich-poor gap isn't allowed to become obscene, then fine. I'm happy to have the blend of capitalism and socialism that works, but not one that has been hijacked by the ultra-rich. In the USA it appears there is no longer a democracy, for example, because they have FPTP elections with a two-party state, both sides of which have been bought up. Is there a cap on election spending? Does all election income have to be declared? Somehow I doubt it. Hence the ultra rich fund their party to make them even ultra-richer. The same is happening in other countries, of course. I would suspect a conspiracy started in the 80s but I don't know if they're that well organised. Though then again, why not? How can wealth persuade poverty to use its political freedom to keep wealth in power? -- Aneurin Bevan It appears they no longer need to. Expect the face of big brother to be revealed as, not Stalin after all, but Mr Monopoly. On 13 April 2015 at 09:03, spudboy100 via Everything List everything-list@googlegroups.com wrote: I don't disagree, especially when in the US, the billionaires run everything. Good if they chose wisely, Bad if they don't or decide not to. Like Indiana Jones and the Jesus Chalice or whatever it was called. Choose wisely said the 800 year old Knight. My original point was that Liz was basically saying things have devolved under capitalism, the environment, wars, and I was refocusing on what she left out, regarding the glories of socialism. If one is going to blast, at least blast fairly. This is basically what I call the Wattenberg method, after the government studies professor who asked, Compared to what and compared to when? Also, there are no protests or disruptions from the rule of the rich, nowadays. It's not like the serfs have run into the streets and overturned busses, or lighting trash fires, blocking highways, etc. Therefore, we must be ok with all this rule by the rich? Your friends at Davos are hopefully, wiser, than the politicians they own, because right now things seem to be getting unpleasant internationally now. -Original Message- From: Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be To: everything-list everything-list@googlegroups.com Sent: Sun, Apr 12, 2015 5:38 am Subject: Re: Life in the Islamic State for women On 10 Apr 2015, at 13:34, spudboy100 via Everything List wrote: The year is 2015. Is half the world enslaved now? If so, the violence in the world isn't being aimed at capitalists with top hats, suits, monocles, and cigarette holders. If you wish to speak of what the Belgians did in the Congo, 120 years ago, I will heartily agree. You are also ignoring the damage done to the environment by the communists in the USSR and the PRC. Socialism killed the Aral Sea, not capitalism, It was socialism that caused Chernobyl not Capitalism, and the Soviet radioactive materials fires in Kyrgyzstan. Counterpoint! It was capitalism that produced Fukushima by building a reactor too close to the sea. But capitalists are forced to react against an exorcised public, and communists just mow them down. -Original Message- From: LizR lizj...@gmail.com To: everything-list everything-list@googlegroups.com Sent: Thu, Apr 9, 2015 8:50 pm Subject: Re: Life in the Islamic State for women On 10 April 2015 at 03:33, spudboy100 via Everything List everything-list@googlegroups.com wrote: Why not say, Ah! but the Third Reich was only going through it's baby steps, and thus, made a few mistakes along the way. Communism, as a governmental form leads to bigtime killings, and the economics aren't very good either. The same can be said of capitalism, or whatever you want to call the system that has enslaved half the world and may end up destroying most of it for human habitation. The problem is not capitalism (nor really communism, islam, ...). The problem are people who pervert it ( them) for their own special interests. In a working sane laical democracy we can be protected against such perversion, but today, I am not sure there is any working democracy anywhere (with perhaps some few exceptions). If people can lie on cannabis for 75 years, and on cancer for 40 years, they can lie on many things. It is clear that there is no more any separation between media and politics, and that lack of separation is the democracy killer n0 1. (I am well placed to judge this. When I got the french price for my PhD thesis, a dozen of journalists have interviewed me on the work (not the harassment) and only one
Re: Life in the Islamic State for women
I read the opinion piece, Liz. Yes, trillions have been wasted, and trillions more to come. But socialists know how to waste a nations wealth as well. Try considering a more, nuanced, approach to money and politics. Try seeing humans as the rats in BF Skinner's experiments. Think of rewards, and the withdrawl of rewards for failing goals. What's the reward for billionaires to behave more, responsibly, for politicians to behave more productively, for Liz to see things Spud's way? As of now, nothing! There's no practical reward for you to agree with me on this subject. So you won't because, who is this bloody Yank, and who the hell does he think he is! Liz might ask, what's in it for me? And I reply, nothing, Liz, because this is how people see their world. Nor, will the billionaires obey our pleadings, or protests, unless there's something in it for them. A guy to view on all this is david bueno di misquito, who works at stanford university. A few of his lectures are on youtube.com. peep-peep! Says spud the rat, peep-peep. Sent from AOL Mobile Mail -Original Message- From: LizR lizj...@gmail.com To: everything-list everything-list@googlegroups.com Sent: Sun, Apr 12, 2015 06:38 PM Subject: Re: Life in the Islamic State for women div id=AOLMsgPart_2_b9433600-9d32-4a8b-ac13-0b25c8198bd1 div dir=ltr Here you go. a target=_blank href=http://readersupportednews.org/opinion2/277-75/29581-heinous-waste-of-money-officially-begins;http://readersupportednews.org/opinion2/277-75/29581-heinous-waste-of-money-officially-begins/a I'm not in favour of socialism as practiced by Stalin etc, of course, which was actually totalitarianism - but I am in favour of it as practiced in the UK (the NHS etc) - or Sweden, for example - if high taxes are used to fund agreed-upon pub lic goods, infrastructure, education, hospitals and welfare, if the greatest rich-poor gap isn't allowed to become obscene, then fine. I'm happy to have the blend of capitalism and socialism that works, but not one that has been hijacked by the ultra-rich. In the USA it appears there is no longer a democracy, for example, because they have FPTP elections with a two-party state, both sides of which have been bought up. Is there a cap on election spending? Does all election income have to be declared? Somehow I doubt it. Hence the ultra rich fund their party to make them even ultra-richer. The same is happening in other countries, of course. I would suspect a conspiracy started in the 80s but I don't know if they're that well organised. Though then again, why not? How can wealth persuade poverty to use its political freedom to keep wealth in power? -- Aneurin Bevan It appears they no longer need to. Expect the face of big brother to be revealed as, not Stalin after all, but Mr Monopoly. /div div class=aolmail_gmail_extra div class=aolmail_gmail_quote On 13 April 2015 at 09:03, spudboy100 via Everything List span dir=ltra target=_blank href=mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com;everything-list@googlegroups.com/a/span wrote: blockquote class=aolmail_gmail_quote style=margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex font color=black size=2 face=arial font style=background-color:transparentI don't disagree, especially when in the US, the billionaires run everything. Good if they chose wisely, Bad if they don't or decide not to. Like Indiana Jones and the Jesus Chalice or whatever it was called. Choose wisely said the 800 year old Knight. My original point was that Liz was basically saying things have devolved under capitalism, the environment, wars, and I was refocusing on what she left out, regarding the glories of socialism. If one is going to blast, at least blast fairly. This is basically what I call the Wattenberg method, after the government studies professor who asked, Compared to what and compared to when? Also, there are no protests or disruptions from the rule of the rich, nowadays. It's not like the serfs have run into the streets and overturned busses, or lighting trash fires, blocking highways, etc. Therefore, we must be ok with all this rule by the rich? Your friends at Davos are hopefully, wiser, than the politicians they own, because right now things seem to be getting unpleasant internationally now. /font div class=aolmail_h5 div div style=color:black;font-family:arial,helvetica;font-size:10pt -Original Message- From: Bruno Marchal a target=_blank href=mailto:marc...@ulb.ac.be;marc...@ulb.ac.be/a To: everything-list a target=_blank href=mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com;everything-list@googlegroups.com/a Sent: Sun, Apr 12, 2015 5:38 am Subject: Re: Life in the Islamic State for women
Re: Life in the Islamic State for women
On 10 Apr 2015, at 13:34, spudboy100 via Everything List wrote: The year is 2015. Is half the world enslaved now? If so, the violence in the world isn't being aimed at capitalists with top hats, suits, monocles, and cigarette holders. If you wish to speak of what the Belgians did in the Congo, 120 years ago, I will heartily agree. You are also ignoring the damage done to the environment by the communists in the USSR and the PRC. Socialism killed the Aral Sea, not capitalism, It was socialism that caused Chernobyl not Capitalism, and the Soviet radioactive materials fires in Kyrgyzstan. Counterpoint! It was capitalism that produced Fukushima by building a reactor too close to the sea. But capitalists are forced to react against an exorcised public, and communists just mow them down. -Original Message- From: LizR lizj...@gmail.com To: everything-list everything-list@googlegroups.com Sent: Thu, Apr 9, 2015 8:50 pm Subject: Re: Life in the Islamic State for women On 10 April 2015 at 03:33, spudboy100 via Everything List everything-list@googlegroups.com wrote: Why not say, Ah! but the Third Reich was only going through it's baby steps, and thus, made a few mistakes along the way. Communism, as a governmental form leads to bigtime killings, and the economics aren't very good either. The same can be said of capitalism, or whatever you want to call the system that has enslaved half the world and may end up destroying most of it for human habitation. The problem is not capitalism (nor really communism, islam, ...). The problem are people who pervert it ( them) for their own special interests. In a working sane laical democracy we can be protected against such perversion, but today, I am not sure there is any working democracy anywhere (with perhaps some few exceptions). If people can lie on cannabis for 75 years, and on cancer for 40 years, they can lie on many things. It is clear that there is no more any separation between media and politics, and that lack of separation is the democracy killer n0 1. (I am well placed to judge this. When I got the french price for my PhD thesis, a dozen of journalists have interviewed me on the work (not the harassment) and only one of them has been able to publish the interview). Democracies have shown that they are not immune against propaganda. BTW, evidences continue to accumulate that the cannabinoïds cure cancer much more efficaciously than chemo and radio. In fact in Israel, they have understood how and why the cannabinoïds work so well: their agonist play key role in the molecular repairs, and the evacuation of sick cells in the organism. It explains also why the cannabis cure (known since 5000 years) has a so large spectrum, and is sometimes the only known cure, like with auto-immune disease, glaucoma, At least things are beginning to change, albeit slowly, on this. We know also that prohibition does not work, except for financing terrorism and international criminality. I don't believe at all in the war on drug and in the war on terror, as the first step to win the second would consist in stopping the first. Financial lobbying is also a complete nonsense. It replace the political debate by authoritative arguments, automatically. It kills democracy almost as much as the lack of separation of the powers. It is the democracy killer n° 2. Bruno -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/ -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Re: Life in the Islamic State for women
I don't disagree, especially when in the US, the billionaires run everything. Good if they chose wisely, Bad if they don't or decide not to. Like Indiana Jones and the Jesus Chalice or whatever it was called. Choose wisely said the 800 year old Knight. My original point was that Liz was basically saying things have devolved under capitalism, the environment, wars, and I was refocusing on what she left out, regarding the glories of socialism. If one is going to blast, at least blast fairly. This is basically what I call the Wattenberg method, after the government studies professor who asked, Compared to what and compared to when? Also, there are no protests or disruptions from the rule of the rich, nowadays. It's not like the serfs have run into the streets and overturned busses, or lighting trash fires, blocking highways, etc. Therefore, we must be ok with all this rule by the rich? Your friends at Davos are hopefully, wiser, than the politicians they own, because right now things seem to be getting unpleasant internationally now. -Original Message- From: Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be To: everything-list everything-list@googlegroups.com Sent: Sun, Apr 12, 2015 5:38 am Subject: Re: Life in the Islamic State for women On 10 Apr 2015, at 13:34, spudboy100 via Everything List wrote: The year is 2015. Is half the world enslaved now? If so, the violence in the world isn't being aimed at capitalists with top hats, suits, monocles, and cigarette holders. If you wish to speak of what the Belgians did in the Congo, 120 years ago, I will heartily agree. You are also ignoring the damage done to the environment by the communists in the USSR and the PRC. Socialism killed the Aral Sea, not capitalism, It was socialism that caused Chernobyl not Capitalism, and the Soviet radioactive materials fires in Kyrgyzstan. Counterpoint! It was capitalism that produced Fukushima by building a reactor too close to the sea. But capitalists are forced to react against an exorcised public, and communists just mow them down. -Original Message- From: LizR lizj...@gmail.com To: everything-list everything-list@googlegroups.com Sent: Thu, Apr 9, 2015 8:50 pm Subject: Re: Life in the Islamic State for women On 10 April 2015 at 03:33, spudboy100 via Everything List everything-list@googlegroups.com wrote: Why not say, Ah! but the Third Reich was only going through it's baby steps, and thus, made a few mistakes along the way. Communism, as a governmental form leads to bigtime killings, and the economics aren't very good either. The same can be said of capitalism, or whatever you want to call the system that has enslaved half the world and may end up destroying most of it for human habitation. The problem is not capitalism (nor really communism, islam, ...). The problem are people who pervert it ( them) for their own special interests. In a working sane laical democracy we can be protected against such perversion, but today, I am not sure there is any working democracy anywhere (with perhaps some few exceptions). If people can lie on cannabis for 75 years, and on cancer for 40 years, they can lie on many things. It is clear that there is no more any separation between media and politics, and that lack of separation is the democracy killer n0 1. (I am well placed to judge this. When I got the french price for my PhD thesis, a dozen of journalists have interviewed me on the work (not the harassment) and only one of them has been able to publish the interview). Democracies have shown that they are not immune against propaganda. BTW, evidences continue to accumulate that the cannabinoïds cure cancer much more efficaciously than chemo and radio. In fact in Israel, they have understood how and why the cannabinoïds work so well: their agonist play key role in the molecular repairs, and the evacuation of sick cells in the organism. It explains also why the cannabis cure (known since 5000 years) has a so large spectrum, and is sometimes the only known cure, like with auto-immune disease, glaucoma, At least things are beginning to change, albeit slowly, on this. We know also that prohibition does not work, except for financing terrorism and international criminality. I don't believe at all in the war on drug and in the war on terror, as the first step to win the second would consist in stopping the first. Financial lobbying is also a complete nonsense. It replace the political debate by authoritative arguments, automatically. It kills democracy almost
Re: Life in the Islamic State for women
I'm sorry, yes I am big and ugly, but I must insert a reality check on this. Sure, Stalin was a mass murderer of millions, but communism could still work! Yeah, it worked for Stalin, then it worked for Mao where we had the largest die off (aside from the 1347 plague) in human history. We had Pol Pot and we have the Kim dynasty. What more evidence do we need that communists will do murdering big time. Why not say, Ah! but the Third Reich was only going through it's baby steps, and thus, made a few mistakes along the way. Communism, as a governmental form leads to bigtime killings, and the economics aren't very good either. Thanks Brent, I keep saying this but seem to get reactions along the lines of Stalin was evil therefore communism can't work for anyone, ever. It not only works for tribes, families and villages, it can even work to a reasonable extent in societies where people are closely related. There appears to be a rough correlation between the degree of interrelatedness of people in a socity and the degree to which social welfare programmes and so on are implemented, in my admittedly limited experience. You forgot to mention that it works very well for the upper class, too, who tend to look after themselves with old boys' networks etc. Hence the slogan of the West should really be - capitalism for the masses, communism for the rich! -Original Message- From: LizR lizj...@gmail.com To: everything-list everything-list@googlegroups.com Sent: Wed, Apr 8, 2015 8:42 pm Subject: Re: Life in the Islamic State for women Brent: Communism is not a terrible idea - it works fine for families. A lot of political problems come from trying to extend ethics that evolved for families and small tribes to nation states of millions of unrelated people. Thanks Brent, I keep saying this but seem to get reactions along the lines of Stalin was evil therefore communism can't work for anyone, ever. It not only works for tribes, families and villages, it can even work to a reasonable extent in societies where people are closely related. There appears to be a rough correlation between the degree of interrelatedness of people in a socity and the degree to which social welfare programmes and so on are implemented, in my admittedly limited experience. You forgot to mention that it works very well for the upper class, too, who tend to look after themselves with old boys' networks etc. Hence the slogan of the West should really be - capitalism for the masses, communism for the rich! -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Re: Life in the Islamic State for women
On Thu, Apr 9, 2015 at 2:42 AM, LizR lizj...@gmail.com wrote: Brent: Communism is not a terrible idea - it works fine for families. A lot of political problems come from trying to extend ethics that evolved for families and small tribes to nation states of millions of unrelated people. Thanks Brent, I keep saying this but seem to get reactions along the lines of Stalin was evil therefore communism can't work for anyone, ever. When discussing communism people assume nations. Figuring out a solution for a family or tribe is easy and tells us nothing about its scalability. It's not just Stalin. It's also Mao (who killed millions with his cultural revolution and great leap forward), Pol Pot (more than 10% of the Cambodian population died in his killing fields), Nicolae Ceausescu and the great famine that his inane policies generated and the Kim dynasty (enough said). Then you have the long tail of poverty creators and oppressors of free speech like Fidel and Hugh Chavez. It's not that these people represent the ideals of communism, but it seems to be the case that one of these fine fellows always seems to end up in charge, across cultures and decades. It not only works for tribes, families and villages, it can even work to a reasonable extent in societies where people are closely related. There appears to be a rough correlation between the degree of interrelatedness of people in a socity and the degree to which social welfare programmes and so on are implemented, in my admittedly limited experience. This might explain why communism so frequently comes with genocide. You forgot to mention that it works very well for the upper class, too, who tend to look after themselves with old boys' networks etc. Hence the slogan of the West should really be - capitalism for the masses, communism for the rich! -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Re: Life in the Islamic State for women
John, please see my answers below your questions. On Wed, Apr 8, 2015 at 1:08 AM, John Mikes jami...@gmail.com wrote: Samiya, please allow me one (two?) little questions: -- How can you tell a 'real' interpreter of God's words from a pretender? -- and I do not only refer to the 'publication' of the entire Script, there may be VAST differences between practical interpretations of the rightfully published details, whatever is included in the authentic total. (Look at e.g. the political variations as 'religious' prescriptions, law systems, state-formats, stuff to learn about the world etc.) A real messenger/prophet/interpreter does not ask for any personal benefit or remuneration. The pretenders seek worldly benefits. Following are quotes from the preachings of some messengers: Quoting Messenger Noah: http://quran.com/26/109 Sahih International And I do not ask you for it any payment. My payment is only from the Lord of the worlds. Quoting Messenger Hud: http://quran.com/26/127 Sahih International And I do not ask you for it any payment. My payment is only from the Lord of the worlds. Quoting Messenger Saleh: http://quran.com/26/145 Sahih International And I do not ask you for it any payment. My payment is only from the Lord of the worlds. Quoting Messenger Lot: http://quran.com/26/164 Sahih International And I do not ask you for it any payment. My payment is only from the Lord of the worlds. Quoting Messenger Shu'ayb: http://quran.com/26/180 Sahih International And I do not ask you for it any payment. My payment is only from the Lord of the worlds. --Is there a reson to call HIM and not HER? 1) We believe that God is above gender, but since God is referred to in the Quran with the masculine pronouns, so we follow the Quran's preference of pronouns for God. 2) Though http://quran.com/4/1 states that we should revere the wombs, but it clarifies in other places that worship is only for the ONLY God and that the worship of female deities Satan-worship http://quran.com/4/117 . http://quran.com/4/1 Sahih International O mankind, fear your Lord, who created you from one soul and created from it its mate and dispersed from both of them many men and women. And fear Allah , through whom you ask one another, and the wombs. Indeed Allah is ever, over you, an Observer. http://quran.com/4/116-120 Sahih International Indeed, Allah does not forgive association with Him, but He forgives what is less than that for whom He wills. And he who associates others with Allah has certainly gone far astray. They call upon instead of Him none but female [deities], and they [actually] call upon none but a rebellious Satan. Whom Allah has cursed. For he had said, I will surely take from among Your servants a specific portion. And I will mislead them, and I will arouse in them [sinful] desires, and I will command them so they will slit the ears of cattle, and I will command them so they will change the creation of Allah . And whoever takes Satan as an ally instead of Allah has certainly sustained a clear loss. Satan promises them and arouses desire in them. But Satan does not promise them except delusion. As I learned (from you), there is no gender differentiation in Heavens, what I found VERY emlightening. Note: The Quran uses the term Heaven(s) [sama; pl:samawat] for sky/space/cosmos. For the Hereafter, though the Heaven(s) and Earth will be recreated, the term for the place of reward is Garden(s) [jannat], and the term for the place of punishment is Fire [naar]. I speculate, but I do not know if there will or will not be any gender differentiation in the Hereafter. Following is the basis of my speculation: 1) Human male and female pair has been created from a single entity [ http://signsandscience.blogspot.com/2014/12/the-first-humans.html ]. http://quran.com/4/1 Sahih International O mankind, fear your Lord, who created you from one soul and created from it its mate and dispersed from both of them many men and women. And fear Allah , through whom you ask one another, and the wombs. Indeed Allah is ever, over you, an Observer. http://quran.com/6/98 Sahih International And it is He who produced you from one soul and [gave you] a place of dwelling and of storage. We have detailed the signs for a people who understand. http://quran.com/7/189 Sahih International It is He who created you from one soul and created from it its mate that he might dwell in security with her. And when he covers her, she carries a light burden and continues therein. And when it becomes heavy, they both invoke Allah , their Lord, If You should give us a good [child], we will surely be among the grateful. 2) Verses in the Quran state that, in the Gardens of Eden, the righteous will be reunited (dwell together) with their righteous ascendants, descendants and azwaj ( which can either mean spouses / pairs / kinds). I am more inclined to think it means soulmate. http://quran.com/81/7 Sahih International And when the souls are paired
Re: Life in the Islamic State for women
Samiya, good answers. I would have liked to 'see' that ALL* false* messengers DO require worldly benefits - some may not. Jesus Christ did not - would you call the luxurious life of the Pope of Rome - his successor(?) - a proof for false messages? Your replies are longer than I can go into at 94. Especially NOT to read further. Maybe 40-50 years ago I could have had a chance...But at that time, after having studied more than 1 religion (in practice as well) I was just losing my faith. That was the reason not to extend my interest into MORE (wider?) religious facets. One thing is for sure: I would have never accepted the brutal/violent punishments as in Sharia-law. I know, it was ubiquitous at those times, even for the next ~1,000 years, but I am against those ancient sadistic methods and even lawful killings. I believe humanity made some advance, at least in this respect and at some levels. I cannot condone the* 'faith' *of those who pleasure in beheadings, stonings, dismemberings, burning alive, no matter for what reasons, nor in a Supernatural of endless love, wisdom and care feeling satisfaction in such brutalities. Maybe I am just an old wimp. * Please excuse my ignorance: do Shiates 'read' the same Quran as Sunnis? * On Wed, Apr 8, 2015 at 3:05 AM, Samiya Illias samiyaill...@gmail.com wrote: John, please see my answers below your questions. On Wed, Apr 8, 2015 at 1:08 AM, John Mikes jami...@gmail.com wrote: Samiya, please allow me one (two?) little questions: -- How can you tell a 'real' interpreter of God's words from a pretender? -- and I do not only refer to the 'publication' of the entire Script, there may be VAST differences between practical interpretations of the rightfully published details, whatever is included in the authentic total. (Look at e.g. the political variations as 'religious' prescriptions, law systems, state-formats, stuff to learn about the world etc.) A real messenger/prophet/interpreter does not ask for any personal benefit or remuneration. The pretenders seek worldly benefits. Following are quotes from the preachings of some messengers: Quoting Messenger Noah: http://quran.com/26/109 Sahih International And I do not ask you for it any payment. My payment is only from the Lord of the worlds. Quoting Messenger Hud: http://quran.com/26/127 Sahih International And I do not ask you for it any payment. My payment is only from the Lord of the worlds. Quoting Messenger Saleh: http://quran.com/26/145 Sahih International And I do not ask you for it any payment. My payment is only from the Lord of the worlds. Quoting Messenger Lot: http://quran.com/26/164 Sahih International And I do not ask you for it any payment. My payment is only from the Lord of the worlds. Quoting Messenger Shu'ayb: http://quran.com/26/180 Sahih International And I do not ask you for it any payment. My payment is only from the Lord of the worlds. --Is there a reson to call HIM and not HER? 1) We believe that God is above gender, but since God is referred to in the Quran with the masculine pronouns, so we follow the Quran's preference of pronouns for God. 2) Though http://quran.com/4/1 states that we should revere the wombs, but it clarifies in other places that worship is only for the ONLY God and that the worship of female deities Satan-worship http://quran.com/4/117 . http://quran.com/4/1 Sahih International O mankind, fear your Lord, who created you from one soul and created from it its mate and dispersed from both of them many men and women. And fear Allah , through whom you ask one another, and the wombs. Indeed Allah is ever, over you, an Observer. http://quran.com/4/116-120 Sahih International Indeed, Allah does not forgive association with Him, but He forgives what is less than that for whom He wills. And he who associates others with Allah has certainly gone far astray. They call upon instead of Him none but female [deities], and they [actually] call upon none but a rebellious Satan. Whom Allah has cursed. For he had said, I will surely take from among Your servants a specific portion. And I will mislead them, and I will arouse in them [sinful] desires, and I will command them so they will slit the ears of cattle, and I will command them so they will change the creation of Allah . And whoever takes Satan as an ally instead of Allah has certainly sustained a clear loss. Satan promises them and arouses desire in them. But Satan does not promise them except delusion. As I learned (from you), there is no gender differentiation in Heavens, what I found VERY emlightening. Note: The Quran uses the term Heaven(s) [sama; pl:samawat] for sky/space/cosmos. For the Hereafter, though the Heaven(s) and Earth will be recreated, the term for the place of reward is Garden(s) [jannat], and the term for the place of punishment is Fire [naar]. I speculate, but I do not know if there will or will not be any gender differentiation in the
Re: Life in the Islamic State for women
John, I'll try to answer as briefly as possible. Please see below On Thu, Apr 9, 2015 at 1:03 AM, John Mikes jami...@gmail.com wrote: Samiya, good answers. I would have liked to 'see' that ALL* false* messengers DO require worldly benefits - some may not. Jesus Christ did not - We believe that Jesus was a true Messenger of God. http://quran.com/2/87 Sahih International And We did certainly give Moses the Torah and followed up after him with messengers. And We gave Jesus, the son of Mary, clear proofs and supported him with the Pure Spirit. But is it [not] that every time a messenger came to you, [O Children of Israel], with what your souls did not desire, you were arrogant? And a party [of messengers] you denied and another party you killed. http://quran.com/2/136 Sahih International Say, [O believers], We have believed in Allah and what has been revealed to us and what has been revealed to Abraham and Ishmael and Isaac and Jacob and the Descendants and what was given to Moses and Jesus and what was given to the prophets from their Lord. We make no distinction between any of them, and we are Muslims [in submission] to Him. http://quran.com/2/253 Sahih International Those messengers - some of them We caused to exceed others. Among them were those to whom Allah spoke, and He raised some of them in degree. And We gave Jesus, the Son of Mary, clear proofs, and We supported him with the Pure Spirit. If Allah had willed, those [generations] succeeding them would not have fought each other after the clear proofs had come to them. But they differed, and some of them believed and some of them disbelieved. And if Allah had willed, they would not have fought each other, but Allah does what He intends. http://quran.com/3/45 Sahih International [And mention] when the angels said, O Mary, indeed Allah gives you good tidings of a word from Him, whose name will be the Messiah, Jesus, the son of Mary - distinguished in this world and the Hereafter and among those brought near [to Allah ]. http://quran.com/3/59 Sahih International Indeed, the example of Jesus to Allah is like that of Adam. He created Him from dust; then He said to him, Be, and he was. http://quran.com/4/157 Sahih International And [for] their saying, Indeed, we have killed the Messiah, Jesus, the son of Mary, the messenger of Allah . And they did not kill him, nor did they crucify him; but [another] was made to resemble him to them. And indeed, those who differ over it are in doubt about it. They have no knowledge of it except the following of assumption. And they did not kill him, for certain. Concordance of verses about Jesus (Isa) in the Quran: http://corpus.quran.com/search.jsp?q=Isa would you call the luxurious life of the Pope of Rome - his successor(?) - a proof for false messages? We believe the basic teachings of the Paul and his successors are against the letter and spirit of the teachings of Jesus. Jesus came to confirm the Law and to explain its wisdom, so that it is upheld with the correct spirit, and not in a half-hearted manner. Jesus taught Monotheism and to keep duty whole-heartedly. Yet, Paul did away with the Law and started Jesus-worship. Have you visited the Vatican? Its full of symbols of polytheism, particularly of ancient Egypt, including the Obelisk right in the middle of St. Peter's Square. Consider the following two verses from the Bible: http://biblehub.com/exodus/20-4.htm *New International Version* You shall not make for yourself an image in the form of anything in heaven above or on the earth beneath or in the waters below. http://biblehub.com/matthew/5-17.htm *New International Version * Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. Will Jesus allow St. Paul to enter the Kingdom of Heaven: http://can-you-answer.com/CanChristiansAnswer/canChrisAns.htm Your replies are longer than I can go into at 94. Especially NOT to read further. Maybe 40-50 years ago I could have had a chance...But at that time, after having studied more than 1 religion (in practice as well) I was just losing my faith. That was the reason not to extend my interest into MORE (wider?) religious facets. One thing is for sure: I would have never accepted the brutal/violent punishments as in Sharia-law. I know, it was ubiquitous at those times, even for the next ~1,000 years, but I am against those ancient sadistic methods and even lawful killings. I believe humanity made some advance, at least in this respect and at some levels. I cannot condone the* 'faith' *of those who pleasure in beheadings, stonings, dismemberings, burning alive, no matter for what reasons, nor in a Supernatural of endless love, wisdom and care feeling satisfaction in such brutalities. Maybe I am just an old wimp. * Please excuse my ignorance: do Shiates 'read' the same Quran as Sunnis? Yes, they do read the same arabic Quran, though they differ in some beliefs, which leads to
Re: Life in the Islamic State for women
Brent: Communism is not a terrible idea - it works fine for families. A lot of political problems come from trying to extend ethics that evolved for families and small tribes to nation states of millions of unrelated people. Thanks Brent, I keep saying this but seem to get reactions along the lines of Stalin was evil therefore communism can't work for anyone, ever. It not only works for tribes, families and villages, it can even work to a reasonable extent in societies where people are closely related. There appears to be a rough correlation between the degree of interrelatedness of people in a socity and the degree to which social welfare programmes and so on are implemented, in my admittedly limited experience. You forgot to mention that it works very well for the upper class, too, who tend to look after themselves with old boys' networks etc. Hence the slogan of the West should really be - capitalism for the masses, communism for the rich! -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Re: Life in the Islamic State for women
On 4/8/2015 5:42 PM, LizR wrote: Brent: Communism is not a terrible idea - it works fine for families. A lot of political problems come from trying to extend ethics that evolved for families and small tribes to nation states of millions of unrelated people. Thanks Brent, I keep saying this but seem to get reactions along the lines of Stalin was evil therefore communism can't work for anyone, ever. It not only works for tribes, families and villages, it can even work to a reasonable extent in societies where people are closely related. There appears to be a rough correlation between the degree of interrelatedness of people in a socity and the degree to which social welfare programmes and so on are implemented, in my admittedly limited experience. You forgot to mention that it works very well for the upper class, too, who tend to look after themselves with old boys' networks etc. Hence the slogan of the West should really be - capitalism for the masses, communism for the rich! And within a corporation there is no free market, assets are not allocated according to earnings, but according to projections of possible earnings or market capture (Darwinian defeat of other corporations). However, I think we should also recognize that a free-market is also one of the concepts that works well on the small local scale, such as Adam Smith observed, and is the right social economics on that scale. It is only in scaling up that we need anti-monopoly, anti-trust, etc. And the free-market does not extend well at all to assets like land, oil, and money where the profit is mainly in rent rather than production. Brent -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Re: Life in the Islamic State for women
John wrote: 'Scriptures (all of them, from the pre-Hebrew ones to the most recent ones) are HUMANLY written (published?) and some (e.g. the Quran) only in ONE *human* language, even prohibiting a translation).' The Quran, revealed in Arabic, has been translated in several languages, and even in the same language by several translators. Multiple translations are available online on many websites, such as: http://quran.com/ http://corpus.quran.com/ http://islamawakened.com/quran/ http://searchtruth.com/list.php According to the Quran, it is the Muslim belief that a series of scriptures were revealed by divine decree for the guidance of mankind, the last of which is the Quran, as Muhammad is the seal (last) of the series of prophets [http://quran.com/33/40 ]. Though humans were able to make changes in previous scriptures (possibly both in the revealed language as well as translations), the arabic Quran is divinely guarded from changes [ http://quran.com/15/9 ]. Translations of certain verses of the Quran differ, and thus, the importance of trying to look up the original arabic words and their range of meanings, and its usage across the Quran. Most of the scriptures we know have been orally transmitted and then recorded (published) by humans, except possibly the Ten Commandments which were given to Moses on stone tablets [http://quran.com/7/145 ]. But that is besides the point. The scriptures were revealed to the human prophets and messengers, in the language of the people they were addressing [ http://quran.com/14/4 ], and thus the copy of the scripture in its revealed language is most likely the original source. There may be errors in translation, therefore, I suggest the study of the original sources, i.e. in the original language of revelation, if possible. It is also important to understand the difference between scripture [divine revelations] and secondary sources, which are efforts to compile teachings of the prophets that are not in the scripture, for example works like Bhagwad Gita, Talmud, Hadith. Of course, there are many errors in these recordings, which can be attributed to human memory or understanding, or both, or may be even deliberate efforts to corrupt the teachings and make additions to the religion. That the message of Hinduism, Judaism, Christianity, Islam, and many other messages, have all suffered greatly because followers have attached primary importance to such secondary sources is quite evident from history. Vedas, Torah, Bible and Quran emphasise upon Monotheism, while the beliefs and worship of the many sects of Hindus, Jews, Christians and Muslims vary greatly. Personally, I see a lot of confusion on this list as well as elsewhere between the primary teachings of a scripture and the practice of those who profess to follow those religions. It is important to not to confuse the two if one is seeking the truth for oneself. For your convenience, following are the verses I referenced above. You can also look up multiple translations on http://islamawakened.com/quran/ http://quran.com/33/40 Pickthall Muhammad is not the father of any man among you, but he is the messenger of Allah and the Seal of the Prophets; and Allah is ever Aware of all things. http://quran.com/15/9 Pickthall Lo! We, even We, reveal the Reminder, and lo! We verily are its Guardian. http://quran.com/7/145 Shakir And We ordained for him in the tablets admonition of every kind and clear explanation of all things; so take hold of them with firmness and enjoin your people to take hold of what is best thereof; I will show you the abode of the transgressors. http://quran.com/14/4 Sahih International And We did not send any messenger except [speaking] in the language of his people to state clearly for them, and Allah sends astray [thereby] whom He wills and guides whom He wills. And He is the Exalted in Might, the Wise. Samiya On Tue, Apr 7, 2015 at 12:49 AM, John Mikes jami...@gmail.com wrote: Samiya, you sweetly fell into the trap of my polite sentence *(...smarter than me*). I did not mention absolute smart. And: I did not ask 'where God came from' - although in an eaarlier post I raised the question 'where (from what system) did the mentioned 'God' come from? A ask, however, Bruno for some explanation he may have about the term God' he uses exrtensively and intensively - dispite of his many times claimed agnosticism. I referred to some 'alien(?) wisdom to re-evaluate out terms -anyway with the criticism that those (new) terms may fit into an alien (not our) system better. Scriptures (all of them, from the pre-Hebrew ones to the most recent ones) are HUMANLY written (published?) and some (e.g. the Quran) only in ONE *human* language, even prohibiting a translation). If, indeed, based on 'Godly' instructions, some 'mortals' (conveying the instructions) should have gotten some believable proof of the 'source' and understanding about the instructed texts. Should we beleieve that after
Re: Life in the Islamic State for women
Samiya, please allow me one (two?) little questions: -- How can you tell a 'real' interpreter of God's words from a pretender? -- and I do not only refer to the 'publication' of the entire Script, there may be VAST differences between practical interpretations of the rightfully published details, whatever is included in the authentic total. (Look at e.g. the political variations as 'religious' prescriptions, law systems, state-formats, stuff to learn about the world etc.) --Is there a reson to call HIM and not HER? As I learned (from you), there is no gender differentiation in Heavens, what I found VERY emlightening. (During the times of the caveman a female Creator (Mistress of the World?) was adored, because of the circumstances of producing new life. The 'male' role was lopsided and diminished in importance. SHE was the BIG ONE. That changed as the mainly male exercised animal husbandry emlightened the bisexual proliferation of living creatures (and was applied to men, too). (A 3rd question out of order - forgive me please: since evolution, human development, ways of mental capacity and lifestyles are unlimited in time to come, does it make any reasonable sense to close the line of potential profets 1500 years ago, only 5 centuries after the previous one, when humanity MAY live for additional millennia(??) before the final judgement?) Apologies John Mikes On Tue, Apr 7, 2015 at 3:40 AM, Samiya Illias samiyaill...@gmail.com wrote: John wrote: 'Scriptures (all of them, from the pre-Hebrew ones to the most recent ones) are HUMANLY written (published?) and some (e.g. the Quran) only in ONE *human* language, even prohibiting a translation).' The Quran, revealed in Arabic, has been translated in several languages, and even in the same language by several translators. Multiple translations are available online on many websites, such as: http://quran.com/ http://corpus.quran.com/ http://islamawakened.com/quran/ http://searchtruth.com/list.php According to the Quran, it is the Muslim belief that a series of scriptures were revealed by divine decree for the guidance of mankind, the last of which is the Quran, as Muhammad is the seal (last) of the series of prophets [http://quran.com/33/40 ]. Though humans were able to make changes in previous scriptures (possibly both in the revealed language as well as translations), the arabic Quran is divinely guarded from changes [ http://quran.com/15/9 ]. Translations of certain verses of the Quran differ, and thus, the importance of trying to look up the original arabic words and their range of meanings, and its usage across the Quran. Most of the scriptures we know have been orally transmitted and then recorded (published) by humans, except possibly the Ten Commandments which were given to Moses on stone tablets [http://quran.com/7/145 ]. But that is besides the point. The scriptures were revealed to the human prophets and messengers, in the language of the people they were addressing [ http://quran.com/14/4 ], and thus the copy of the scripture in its revealed language is most likely the original source. There may be errors in translation, therefore, I suggest the study of the original sources, i.e. in the original language of revelation, if possible. It is also important to understand the difference between scripture [divine revelations] and secondary sources, which are efforts to compile teachings of the prophets that are not in the scripture, for example works like Bhagwad Gita, Talmud, Hadith. Of course, there are many errors in these recordings, which can be attributed to human memory or understanding, or both, or may be even deliberate efforts to corrupt the teachings and make additions to the religion. That the message of Hinduism, Judaism, Christianity, Islam, and many other messages, have all suffered greatly because followers have attached primary importance to such secondary sources is quite evident from history. Vedas, Torah, Bible and Quran emphasise upon Monotheism, while the beliefs and worship of the many sects of Hindus, Jews, Christians and Muslims vary greatly. Personally, I see a lot of confusion on this list as well as elsewhere between the primary teachings of a scripture and the practice of those who profess to follow those religions. It is important to not to confuse the two if one is seeking the truth for oneself. For your convenience, following are the verses I referenced above. You can also look up multiple translations on http://islamawakened.com/quran/ http://quran.com/33/40 Pickthall Muhammad is not the father of any man among you, but he is the messenger of Allah and the Seal of the Prophets; and Allah is ever Aware of all things. http://quran.com/15/9 Pickthall Lo! We, even We, reveal the Reminder, and lo! We verily are its Guardian. http://quran.com/7/145 Shakir And We ordained for him in the tablets admonition of every kind and clear explanation of all things;
Re: Life in the Islamic State for women
On Sun, Apr 5, 2015 at 9:45 PM, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote: It was a totalitarian government, like within a single corporation. Nothing at all like Marx imagined. Where Marx's idea has been realized is in the Amana colonies in the US and the kibbutz in Israel. So why didn't they devolve into totalitarian states? My bet would be size. I have no doubt that communism works at the tribal level. We are evolved for it to work at that scale. Why aren't corporations as oppressive as the GDR? I'd say it has little to do with their economics. It's because people can stay or leave. I agree, but isn't this just the fundamental idea of capitalism? If you can go somewhere else, this means that businesses have to compete and the competition drives progress. Of course, in crony capitalism, one can use capital to interfere with the regulatory bodies with the goal of artificially restricting competition. In real capitalism this remains a problem, because the wealthiest businesses can make their adversaries go bankrupt by selling at a loss for long enough. But this strategy is less stable: the monopoly can always be challenged in the future. Still, many citizens of the GDR risked their lives to get to the other side. There were never attempts in the opposite direction. This is an almost perfect experiment because both groups had the same cultural background, ethnicity, language, etc. John Locke thought owning land was an oxymoron...you could only own the temporary use of land. Didn't matter for hunter-gatherers, but it was problem that had to be solved for agricultural society. John Locke won, at least in Europe. He didn't have to win in England; the land already belonged to the crown in principle. The exceptions were called free holds. Even today much of England is nominally the crown's and is occupied on 100yr leases. The property taxes are so high that you don't really feel that you own land or property. You lease it, and the government will take it away if you are no longer willing or capable of paying said tax. That now a lot the world's GDP comes from capital has created the same kinds of questions about ownership of capital. Given that rg in Piketty's analysis, is it a good idea to allow the Koch brothers to inherit a billion dollar business (that their father built by drilling for Stalin). The question is if there is a better alternative. My country did exactly that in 1974 -- nationalize big factories. Where did I say anything about nationalizing?? It think the Koch brothers inheritance should have been taxed at a much higher marginal rate and I think property, beyond homesteads, should be taxed whether it is investment capital or land or machinery. It's hard to disagree that the world would be better if the Koch brothers had to pay a hefty inheritance tax. In fact, inheritance tax might be the most ethically justifiable. Taxation of investment capital or means of production seems more of a mixed bag, because it also makes it harder for businesses to survive, pursue large longer-term projects, etc. In the end the cost is transferred to the buyer anyway, so why not just have sales tax instead? It also incentivizes the wealthier to allocate more resources to business ventures and less to hedonism. After 6 months almost none were left. I grew up in front of the ruins of a previously thriving flour mill. The currently richest guy in the country was a chemical engineer at one of these factories. He bought it back from the government for almost nothing when it was about to collapse and grew it back to a thriving business. Now he owns a multinational retail chain, which no longer pays taxes in my country because we moved the HQ elsewhere after a law was passed to increase taxes on capital gains. My point being: wealth inequality is a real problem but I believe all attempts to fix it so far have been worse. At the risk of being repetitive, I believe that withdrawing the power of nations to print money out of thin air and determine interest rates would reduce inequality. I don't see how that would address the problem at all. The problem is that capital (money, machinery, land,...) can be used to earn more capital. And ownership of that capital can be passed on. So it's an unstable system. As my grandfather used to say, The richer get richer and the poor get poorer. There are some countervailing factors: economic mobility of individuals, dispersion of inheritance to multiple heirs, loss of wealth through war or mismanagement,... But on average they are overwhelmed. Indexing currency to a limited resource would stop the central bank - normal bank - rich investor supply of credit. Notice that anytime the central bank prints money, it is in fact uniformly extracting resource-buying power for all of the existing money and centralizing that extracted buying power in the new money. The new money is then
Re: Life in the Islamic State for women
Samiya, you sweetly fell into the trap of my polite sentence *(...smarter than me*). I did not mention absolute smart. And: I did not ask 'where God came from' - although in an eaarlier post I raised the question 'where (from what system) did the mentioned 'God' come from? A ask, however, Bruno for some explanation he may have about the term God' he uses exrtensively and intensively - dispite of his many times claimed agnosticism. I referred to some 'alien(?) wisdom to re-evaluate out terms -anyway with the criticism that those (new) terms may fit into an alien (not our) system better. Scriptures (all of them, from the pre-Hebrew ones to the most recent ones) are HUMANLY written (published?) and some (e.g. the Quran) only in ONE *human* language, even prohibiting a translation). If, indeed, based on 'Godly' instructions, some 'mortals' (conveying the instructions) should have gotten some believable proof of the 'source' and understanding about the instructed texts. Should we beleieve that after completing any of those 'Scriptures' such influence stopped short and no correction occurred ever since? Those writing clerks should have exercised a super-human precision and understanding indeed, with a clear view of the Supernatural Mind suggesting the texts. *Most* (religious/political - they mix frequently) Scriptures comfort sadistic human pleasures, even prescribe such for 'violations' against their rules. Even the one considered among the 'meekest' (e.g. Hindy) burn widows at the funeral of the deceased husband etc. I feel it hard to believe (agnosticism?) that in ancient times humanity was that much smarter than after millenia of development into more advanced thinking techiques. Unless your (and Bruno's) Supernatural is indeed supernatural, what should be substantiated at least. Regards On Mon, Apr 6, 2015 at 2:09 AM, Samiya Illias samiyaill...@gmail.com wrote: John, How is it possible to find someone absolutely 'smarter' when each one knows/understands something more about something than others, and is less informed about something than someone else? The scriptures seem to be the only source of 'smarter than human' wisdom. A critical yet humble study of ancient wisdom, doubting human (mis)interpretations and (mis)applications, but having faith in the timelessness of the message(s), searching in the original sources, and sifting wisdom from it all, may just be what we need. Its always been with us, perhaps we are just too arrogant/ignorant to use it, and thus wander aimlessly, searching in vain?! Whenever we see a building or any other object of human technology, we assume that someone conceived, designed and then built it, and that it needs to be maintained, or it ends up as a ruin. We cannot imagine that it just 'appeared on its own'. We even wonder about the purpose or utility of it. Yet, the idea of a God [Conceiver, Designer, Creator and Sustainer of the Heavens and Earth] keeps getting rejected, as well as the Scriptures [User Manual]. Why? Simply because we ask where God came from? Isn't that ignorance leading to arrogance? A vicious circle of arrogance - rejection - innovation - experimentation - failure - suffering - humility - resilience - rebuilding - arrogance - ... We are all in the same boat [Earth], sailing the same sea [Cosmos] and the welfare of the boat and its passengers [everyone and everything on planet Earth] is our collective responsibility and in our interest. We have to help each other understand that, if the journey is to be pleasant and worthwhile! Samiya On Mon, Apr 6, 2015 at 12:11 AM, John Mikes jami...@gmail.com wrote: *Brent:* *your line * *Communism is not a terrible idea - it works fine for families. * *i*s a cop-out. The discussion is not about some closely related peoples' lives, it is about a worldwide socio-economic political system - and you know it. I never dreamed of wealthy people giving up their wealth. Not to general welfare, not to any other worthy goal. A NEW SYSTEM has to be established, definitely on NEW TERMS, the question is: W H O can make it and W H O can estblish it? Not anyone from our rotten slave-driving capital/politico establishment. What if 'people' cannot be pesuaded to 'vote' against their interest? if those millions turn out to be worthless? if - horribile dictu - VOTERS start to *T H I N K ? * *For starters: * when there will be a NON vote? (better: NO WAY vote). I entertained the stupid idea as well to the arrival of powerful aliens with more wisdom than Earthlings and install a new way of thinking. The result was: that could be no better than the present one, implementing new, but not becessarily better patterns (for us). We could corrupt those ideas in no time. Or: those would be useless under our circumstances. Hence my search for someone smarter than me. On Sat, Apr 4, 2015 at 4:15 PM, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote: On 4/4/2015 6:19 AM, Telmo Menezes
Re: Life in the Islamic State for women
John, How is it possible to find someone absolutely 'smarter' when each one knows/understands something more about something than others, and is less informed about something than someone else? The scriptures seem to be the only source of 'smarter than human' wisdom. A critical yet humble study of ancient wisdom, doubting human (mis)interpretations and (mis)applications, but having faith in the timelessness of the message(s), searching in the original sources, and sifting wisdom from it all, may just be what we need. Its always been with us, perhaps we are just too arrogant/ignorant to use it, and thus wander aimlessly, searching in vain?! Whenever we see a building or any other object of human technology, we assume that someone conceived, designed and then built it, and that it needs to be maintained, or it ends up as a ruin. We cannot imagine that it just 'appeared on its own'. We even wonder about the purpose or utility of it. Yet, the idea of a God [Conceiver, Designer, Creator and Sustainer of the Heavens and Earth] keeps getting rejected, as well as the Scriptures [User Manual]. Why? Simply because we ask where God came from? Isn't that ignorance leading to arrogance? A vicious circle of arrogance - rejection - innovation - experimentation - failure - suffering - humility - resilience - rebuilding - arrogance - ... We are all in the same boat [Earth], sailing the same sea [Cosmos] and the welfare of the boat and its passengers [everyone and everything on planet Earth] is our collective responsibility and in our interest. We have to help each other understand that, if the journey is to be pleasant and worthwhile! Samiya On Mon, Apr 6, 2015 at 12:11 AM, John Mikes jami...@gmail.com wrote: *Brent:* *your line * *Communism is not a terrible idea - it works fine for families. * *i*s a cop-out. The discussion is not about some closely related peoples' lives, it is about a worldwide socio-economic political system - and you know it. I never dreamed of wealthy people giving up their wealth. Not to general welfare, not to any other worthy goal. A NEW SYSTEM has to be established, definitely on NEW TERMS, the question is: W H O can make it and W H O can estblish it? Not anyone from our rotten slave-driving capital/politico establishment. What if 'people' cannot be pesuaded to 'vote' against their interest? if those millions turn out to be worthless? if - horribile dictu - VOTERS start to *T H I N K ? * *For starters: * when there will be a NON vote? (better: NO WAY vote). I entertained the stupid idea as well to the arrival of powerful aliens with more wisdom than Earthlings and install a new way of thinking. The result was: that could be no better than the present one, implementing new, but not becessarily better patterns (for us). We could corrupt those ideas in no time. Or: those would be useless under our circumstances. Hence my search for someone smarter than me. On Sat, Apr 4, 2015 at 4:15 PM, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote: On 4/4/2015 6:19 AM, Telmo Menezes wrote: Hi John On Fri, Apr 3, 2015 at 10:10 PM, John Mikes jami...@gmail.com wrote: TELMO: I did not expect from you to point to the 2 centuries old obsolete and theoretical exercise of Marx-Engels (irrespective of Lenin's intermitted LATER speculations) as blueprint for a (still?) viable(?) political system. I don't think it was ever viable, and I don't think it's relevant to the current times, as it is based on too many assumption from an era that is long gone (early Industrialism). What I mean is, when people use the word communism, there is a document that describes precisely what this word is supposed to mean. A blueprint for communism. I do think that Marx-Engels correctly identified social problems that remain being problems to this day, namely the self-reinforcing nature of wealth inequality. The issue is that their proposed solution seems to equalize society by throwing the majority of people into extreme poverty and servitude. It never got further than a tyranny of 'leftish-sounding' slogans by pretenders. As the original authors dreamed it up, it never (and nowhere) did get off from the ground. I know, I lived in a so called Peoples' Democracy (Called 'commi' system - ha ha) which was neither peoples' nor democracy. Nor Marxist, nor Leninist. It was a Stalinist tyranny. And Maoist, Pol-Pot, plus a KimIrSen-istic one. I would be very interested in any story you had to share about those times. I agree that these societies never achieved anything resembling what Marx proposed. The remaining communists of today tend to argue that all of past communist movements were not sincere in their motivations. That might very well be true, but even then it is an important piece of information on human nature. If we are trying to get from A - B and we always stumble on the same horrors along the way, maybe the plan is just not viable for this world. So
Re: Life in the Islamic State for women
On 06 Apr 2015, at 08:09, Samiya Illias wrote: John, How is it possible to find someone absolutely 'smarter' when each one knows/understands something more about something than others, and is less informed about something than someone else? The scriptures seem to be the only source of 'smarter than human' wisdom. A critical yet humble study of ancient wisdom, doubting human (mis)interpretations and (mis)applications, but having faith in the timelessness of the message(s), searching in the original sources, and sifting wisdom from it all, may just be what we need. Its always been with us, perhaps we are just too arrogant/ignorant to use it, and thus wander aimlessly, searching in vain?! It is because the message has always been with us that we need to search inward, and to be skeptical for text and people pretending to know the answer. If you trust the source inside you, it will talk to you. If you trust the talk of any others, it will leave you. Whenever we see a building or any other object of human technology, we assume that someone conceived, designed and then built it, and that it needs to be maintained, or it ends up as a ruin. We cannot imagine that it just 'appeared on its own'. Today we know that simple relation (like z_n = (z^(n-1)^2 + c)) can lead to highly complex structure. We even wonder about the purpose or utility of it. Yet, the idea of a God [Conceiver, Designer, Creator and Sustainer of the Heavens and Earth] keeps getting rejected, as well as the Scriptures [User Manual]. Why? I reject, not God, but the idea of using God to justify anything. Even if true, it cannot be used in an explanation, as it reduce a complex problem into a more complex problem. The human designing a building is more complex than the building. A priori God is more complex than the creation. Invoking God in an explantion is bad science, as it stops the inquiry. It is like the élan vitale of some ancient biologiste. Then user manual can be inspiring and helpful, but none has the right to say that a manual is more authentical than others. That leads to useless conflicts, which again hide the real question. We need to be humble, and to say that a text is authentical against other texts is immodesty. Simply because we ask where God came from? Isn't that ignorance leading to arrogance? We might need to go toward God, and then we might understand something, but we can't use God as the explanation itself, because that is a mockery of an explanation. God made it can only be a poetical way to say I don't know. Yet, when people take scripture literally, it is transformed into shut up and obey, and that leads to the criminal use of religion, genocide, etc. On the contrary, accepting that a sacred text is a human text, pale recovering of a plausible mystical experience by a human, we allow ourselves to comment it, criticized it, and through sequence of comments we can progress, and get possibly closer to the original experience. A vicious circle of arrogance - rejection - innovation - experimentation - failure - suffering - humility - resilience - rebuilding - arrogance - ... We are all in the same boat [Earth], sailing the same sea [Cosmos] and the welfare of the boat and its passengers [everyone and everything on planet Earth] is our collective responsibility and in our interest. We have to help each other understand that, if the journey is to be pleasant and worthwhile! I agree with this, but Earth and Cosmos are still images, and might be less real than Boat and Sea :) Bruno Samiya On Mon, Apr 6, 2015 at 12:11 AM, John Mikes jami...@gmail.com wrote: Brent: your line Communism is not a terrible idea - it works fine for families. is a cop-out. The discussion is not about some closely related peoples' lives, it is about a worldwide socio-economic political system - and you know it. I never dreamed of wealthy people giving up their wealth. Not to general welfare, not to any other worthy goal. A NEW SYSTEM has to be established, definitely on NEW TERMS, the question is: W H O can make it and W H O can estblish it? Not anyone from our rotten slave-driving capital/politico establishment. What if 'people' cannot be pesuaded to 'vote' against their interest? if those millions turn out to be worthless? if - horribile dictu - VOTERS start to T H I N K ? For starters: when there will be a NON vote? (better: NO WAY vote). I entertained the stupid idea as well to the arrival of powerful aliens with more wisdom than Earthlings and install a new way of thinking. The result was: that could be no better than the present one, implementing new, but not becessarily better patterns (for us). We could corrupt those ideas in no time. Or: those would be useless under our circumstances. Hence my search for someone smarter than me. On Sat, Apr 4, 2015 at 4:15 PM, meekerdb
Re: Life in the Islamic State for women
On Sat, Apr 4, 2015 at 10:15 PM, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote: On 4/4/2015 6:19 AM, Telmo Menezes wrote: Hi John On Fri, Apr 3, 2015 at 10:10 PM, John Mikes jami...@gmail.com wrote: TELMO: I did not expect from you to point to the 2 centuries old obsolete and theoretical exercise of Marx-Engels (irrespective of Lenin's intermitted LATER speculations) as blueprint for a (still?) viable(?) political system. I don't think it was ever viable, and I don't think it's relevant to the current times, as it is based on too many assumption from an era that is long gone (early Industrialism). What I mean is, when people use the word communism, there is a document that describes precisely what this word is supposed to mean. A blueprint for communism. I do think that Marx-Engels correctly identified social problems that remain being problems to this day, namely the self-reinforcing nature of wealth inequality. The issue is that their proposed solution seems to equalize society by throwing the majority of people into extreme poverty and servitude. It never got further than a tyranny of 'leftish-sounding' slogans by pretenders. As the original authors dreamed it up, it never (and nowhere) did get off from the ground. I know, I lived in a so called Peoples' Democracy (Called 'commi' system - ha ha) which was neither peoples' nor democracy. Nor Marxist, nor Leninist. It was a Stalinist tyranny. And Maoist, Pol-Pot, plus a KimIrSen-istic one. I would be very interested in any story you had to share about those times. I agree that these societies never achieved anything resembling what Marx proposed. The remaining communists of today tend to argue that all of past communist movements were not sincere in their motivations. That might very well be true, but even then it is an important piece of information on human nature. If we are trying to get from A - B and we always stumble on the same horrors along the way, maybe the plan is just not viable for this world. So far we have learned that either communism is a terrible idea or communist revolutions always end up being hijacked by sociopaths. To be honest, I think both are true. Communism is not a terrible idea - it works fine for families. A lot of political problems come from trying to extend ethics that evolved for families and small tribes to nation states of millions of unrelated people. Agreed. Capitalism has problems from the same source. Owning a flint spearhead you made is unproblematic. If you own it you can prohibit its use, sell it, bequeath it, etc. But when this idea was extended to owning land it created problems. Also true. However, it seems, empirically, that the problems created are not of the same magnitude. We only have History, which is famously written by the winners, so I might be biased. However, there is one unintended large-scale social experiment that makes this very convincing for me: the Berlin wall. The GDR was the closest thing that ever existed to a communist utopia, because it was heavily supported by the USSR to be exactly that. Still, many citizens of the GDR risked their lives to get to the other side. There were never attempts in the opposite direction. This is an almost perfect experiment because both groups had the same cultural background, ethnicity, language, etc. John Locke thought owning land was an oxymoron...you could only own the temporary use of land. Didn't matter for hunter-gatherers, but it was problem that had to be solved for agricultural society. John Locke won, at least in Europe. The property taxes are so high that you don't really feel that you own land or property. You lease it, and the government will take it away if you are no longer willing or capable of paying said tax. That now a lot the world's GDP comes from capital has created the same kinds of questions about ownership of capital. Given that rg in Piketty's analysis, is it a good idea to allow the Koch brothers to inherit a billion dollar business (that their father built by drilling for Stalin). The question is if there is a better alternative. My country did exactly that in 1974 -- nationalize big factories. After 6 months almost none were left. I grew up in front of the ruins of a previously thriving flour mill. The currently richest guy in the country was a chemical engineer at one of these factories. He bought it back from the government for almost nothing when it was about to collapse and grew it back to a thriving business. Now he owns a multinational retail chain, which no longer pays taxes in my country because we moved the HQ elsewhere after a law was passed to increase taxes on capital gains. My point being: wealth inequality is a real problem but I believe all attempts to fix it so far have been worse. At the risk of being repetitive, I believe that withdrawing the power of nations to print money out of thin air and determine interest rates
Re: Life in the Islamic State for women
On 05 Apr 2015, at 11:20, Telmo Menezes wrote: On Sat, Apr 4, 2015 at 10:15 PM, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote: On 4/4/2015 6:19 AM, Telmo Menezes wrote: Hi John On Fri, Apr 3, 2015 at 10:10 PM, John Mikes jami...@gmail.com wrote: TELMO: I did not expect from you to point to the 2 centuries old obsolete and theoretical exercise of Marx-Engels (irrespective of Lenin's intermitted LATER speculations) as blueprint for a (still?) viable(?) political system. I don't think it was ever viable, and I don't think it's relevant to the current times, as it is based on too many assumption from an era that is long gone (early Industrialism). What I mean is, when people use the word communism, there is a document that describes precisely what this word is supposed to mean. A blueprint for communism. I do think that Marx-Engels correctly identified social problems that remain being problems to this day, namely the self-reinforcing nature of wealth inequality. The issue is that their proposed solution seems to equalize society by throwing the majority of people into extreme poverty and servitude. It never got further than a tyranny of 'leftish-sounding' slogans by pretenders. As the original authors dreamed it up, it never (and nowhere) did get off from the ground. I know, I lived in a so called Peoples' Democracy (Called 'commi' system - ha ha) which was neither peoples' nor democracy. Nor Marxist, nor Leninist. It was a Stalinist tyranny. And Maoist, Pol-Pot, plus a KimIrSen- istic one. I would be very interested in any story you had to share about those times. I agree that these societies never achieved anything resembling what Marx proposed. The remaining communists of today tend to argue that all of past communist movements were not sincere in their motivations. That might very well be true, but even then it is an important piece of information on human nature. If we are trying to get from A - B and we always stumble on the same horrors along the way, maybe the plan is just not viable for this world. So far we have learned that either communism is a terrible idea or communist revolutions always end up being hijacked by sociopaths. To be honest, I think both are true. Communism is not a terrible idea - it works fine for families. A lot of political problems come from trying to extend ethics that evolved for families and small tribes to nation states of millions of unrelated people. Agreed. Capitalism has problems from the same source. Owning a flint spearhead you made is unproblematic. If you own it you can prohibit its use, sell it, bequeath it, etc. But when this idea was extended to owning land it created problems. Also true. However, it seems, empirically, that the problems created are not of the same magnitude. We only have History, which is famously written by the winners, so I might be biased. However, there is one unintended large-scale social experiment that makes this very convincing for me: the Berlin wall. The GDR was the closest thing that ever existed to a communist utopia, because it was heavily supported by the USSR to be exactly that. Still, many citizens of the GDR risked their lives to get to the other side. There were never attempts in the opposite direction. This is an almost perfect experiment because both groups had the same cultural background, ethnicity, language, etc. John Locke thought owning land was an oxymoron...you could only own the temporary use of land. Didn't matter for hunter- gatherers, but it was problem that had to be solved for agricultural society. John Locke won, at least in Europe. The property taxes are so high that you don't really feel that you own land or property. You lease it, and the government will take it away if you are no longer willing or capable of paying said tax. That now a lot the world's GDP comes from capital has created the same kinds of questions about ownership of capital. Given that rg in Piketty's analysis, is it a good idea to allow the Koch brothers to inherit a billion dollar business (that their father built by drilling for Stalin). The question is if there is a better alternative. My country did exactly that in 1974 -- nationalize big factories. After 6 months almost none were left. I grew up in front of the ruins of a previously thriving flour mill. The currently richest guy in the country was a chemical engineer at one of these factories. He bought it back from the government for almost nothing when it was about to collapse and grew it back to a thriving business. Now he owns a multinational retail chain, which no longer pays taxes in my country because we moved the HQ elsewhere after a law was passed to increase taxes on capital gains. My point being: wealth inequality is a real problem but I believe all attempts to fix it so far have been worse. At the
Re: Life in the Islamic State for women
*Brent:* *your line * *Communism is not a terrible idea - it works fine for families. * *i*s a cop-out. The discussion is not about some closely related peoples' lives, it is about a worldwide socio-economic political system - and you know it. I never dreamed of wealthy people giving up their wealth. Not to general welfare, not to any other worthy goal. A NEW SYSTEM has to be established, definitely on NEW TERMS, the question is: W H O can make it and W H O can estblish it? Not anyone from our rotten slave-driving capital/politico establishment. What if 'people' cannot be pesuaded to 'vote' against their interest? if those millions turn out to be worthless? if - horribile dictu - VOTERS start to *T H I N K ? * *For starters: * when there will be a NON vote? (better: NO WAY vote). I entertained the stupid idea as well to the arrival of powerful aliens with more wisdom than Earthlings and install a new way of thinking. The result was: that could be no better than the present one, implementing new, but not becessarily better patterns (for us). We could corrupt those ideas in no time. Or: those would be useless under our circumstances. Hence my search for someone smarter than me. On Sat, Apr 4, 2015 at 4:15 PM, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote: On 4/4/2015 6:19 AM, Telmo Menezes wrote: Hi John On Fri, Apr 3, 2015 at 10:10 PM, John Mikes jami...@gmail.com wrote: TELMO: I did not expect from you to point to the 2 centuries old obsolete and theoretical exercise of Marx-Engels (irrespective of Lenin's intermitted LATER speculations) as blueprint for a (still?) viable(?) political system. I don't think it was ever viable, and I don't think it's relevant to the current times, as it is based on too many assumption from an era that is long gone (early Industrialism). What I mean is, when people use the word communism, there is a document that describes precisely what this word is supposed to mean. A blueprint for communism. I do think that Marx-Engels correctly identified social problems that remain being problems to this day, namely the self-reinforcing nature of wealth inequality. The issue is that their proposed solution seems to equalize society by throwing the majority of people into extreme poverty and servitude. It never got further than a tyranny of 'leftish-sounding' slogans by pretenders. As the original authors dreamed it up, it never (and nowhere) did get off from the ground. I know, I lived in a so called Peoples' Democracy (Called 'commi' system - ha ha) which was neither peoples' nor democracy. Nor Marxist, nor Leninist. It was a Stalinist tyranny. And Maoist, Pol-Pot, plus a KimIrSen-istic one. I would be very interested in any story you had to share about those times. I agree that these societies never achieved anything resembling what Marx proposed. The remaining communists of today tend to argue that all of past communist movements were not sincere in their motivations. That might very well be true, but even then it is an important piece of information on human nature. If we are trying to get from A - B and we always stumble on the same horrors along the way, maybe the plan is just not viable for this world. So far we have learned that either communism is a terrible idea or communist revolutions always end up being hijacked by sociopaths. To be honest, I think both are true. Communism is not a terrible idea - it works fine for families. A lot of political problems come from trying to extend ethics that evolved for families and small tribes to nation states of millions of unrelated people. Capitalism has problems from the same source. Owning a flint spearhead you made is unproblematic. If you own it you can prohibit its use, sell it, bequeath it, etc. But when this idea was extended to owning land it created problems. John Locke thought owning land was an oxymoron...you could only own the temporary use of land. Didn't matter for hunter-gatherers, but it was problem that had to be solved for agricultural society. That now a lot the world's GDP comes from capital has created the same kinds of questions about ownership of capital. Given that rg in Piketty's analysis, is it a good idea to allow the Koch brothers to inherit a billion dollar business (that their father built by drilling for Stalin). Capitalism - in my view an advanced form of slavery, following feudalism - started to destroy the entire human experiment on this Globe - way before the warming entered the picture. It never 'faced' a competition of any 'socialistic' challenger. It succumbbed to the authoritarian religious tyrannies (brutal and violent, or just retracting and philosophical). As with communism, there is a big gap between the theory and the implementation. Advanced form of slavery might be a way to put it, but an even more cynical view would be that there's always been slavery to some degree. I believe that
Re: Life in the Islamic State for women
On 4/5/2015 2:20 AM, Telmo Menezes wrote: On Sat, Apr 4, 2015 at 10:15 PM, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net mailto:meeke...@verizon.net wrote: On 4/4/2015 6:19 AM, Telmo Menezes wrote: Hi John On Fri, Apr 3, 2015 at 10:10 PM, John Mikes jami...@gmail.com mailto:jami...@gmail.com wrote: TELMO: I did not expect from you to point to the 2 centuries old obsolete and theoretical exercise of Marx-Engels (irrespective of Lenin's intermitted LATER speculations) as blueprint for a (still?) viable(?) political system. I don't think it was ever viable, and I don't think it's relevant to the current times, as it is based on too many assumption from an era that is long gone (early Industrialism). What I mean is, when people use the word communism, there is a document that describes precisely what this word is supposed to mean. A blueprint for communism. I do think that Marx-Engels correctly identified social problems that remain being problems to this day, namely the self-reinforcing nature of wealth inequality. The issue is that their proposed solution seems to equalize society by throwing the majority of people into extreme poverty and servitude. It never got further than a tyranny of 'leftish-sounding' slogans by pretenders. As the original authors dreamed it up, it never (and nowhere) did get off from the ground. I know, I lived in a so called Peoples' Democracy (Called 'commi' system - ha ha) which was neither peoples' nor democracy. Nor Marxist, nor Leninist. It was a Stalinist tyranny. And Maoist, Pol-Pot, plus a KimIrSen-istic one. I would be very interested in any story you had to share about those times. I agree that these societies never achieved anything resembling what Marx proposed. The remaining communists of today tend to argue that all of past communist movements were not sincere in their motivations. That might very well be true, but even then it is an important piece of information on human nature. If we are trying to get from A - B and we always stumble on the same horrors along the way, maybe the plan is just not viable for this world. So far we have learned that either communism is a terrible idea or communist revolutions always end up being hijacked by sociopaths. To be honest, I think both are true. Communism is not a terrible idea - it works fine for families. A lot of political problems come from trying to extend ethics that evolved for families and small tribes to nation states of millions of unrelated people. Agreed. Capitalism has problems from the same source. Owning a flint spearhead you made is unproblematic. If you own it you can prohibit its use, sell it, bequeath it, etc. But when this idea was extended to owning land it created problems. Also true. However, it seems, empirically, that the problems created are not of the same magnitude. We only have History, which is famously written by the winners, so I might be biased. However, there is one unintended large-scale social experiment that makes this very convincing for me: the Berlin wall. The GDR was the closest thing that ever existed to a communist utopia, because it was heavily supported by the USSR to be exactly that. It was a totalitarian government, like within a single corporation. Nothing at all like Marx imagined. Where Marx's idea has been realized is in the Amana colonies in the US and the kibbutz in Israel. So why didn't they devolve into totalitarian states? Why aren't corporations as oppressive as the GDR? I'd say it has little to do with their economics. It's because people can stay or leave. Still, many citizens of the GDR risked their lives to get to the other side. There were never attempts in the opposite direction. This is an almost perfect experiment because both groups had the same cultural background, ethnicity, language, etc. John Locke thought owning land was an oxymoron...you could only own the temporary use of land. Didn't matter for hunter-gatherers, but it was problem that had to be solved for agricultural society. John Locke won, at least in Europe. He didn't have to win in England; the land already belonged to the crown in principle. The exceptions were called free holds. Even today much of England is nominally the crown's and is occupied on 100yr leases. The property taxes are so high that you don't really feel that you own land or property. You lease it, and the government will take it away if you are no longer willing or capable of paying said tax. That now a lot the world's GDP comes from capital has created the same kinds of questions about ownership of capital. Given that rg in Piketty's analysis, is it a good idea to allow the Koch brothers to inherit a billion dollar business (that
Re: Life in the Islamic State for women
Hi John On Fri, Apr 3, 2015 at 10:10 PM, John Mikes jami...@gmail.com wrote: TELMO: I did not expect from you to point to the 2 centuries old obsolete and theoretical exercise of Marx-Engels (irrespective of Lenin's intermitted LATER speculations) as blueprint for a (still?) viable(?) political system. I don't think it was ever viable, and I don't think it's relevant to the current times, as it is based on too many assumption from an era that is long gone (early Industrialism). What I mean is, when people use the word communism, there is a document that describes precisely what this word is supposed to mean. A blueprint for communism. I do think that Marx-Engels correctly identified social problems that remain being problems to this day, namely the self-reinforcing nature of wealth inequality. The issue is that their proposed solution seems to equalize society by throwing the majority of people into extreme poverty and servitude. It never got further than a tyranny of 'leftish-sounding' slogans by pretenders. As the original authors dreamed it up, it never (and nowhere) did get off from the ground. I know, I lived in a so called Peoples' Democracy (Called 'commi' system - ha ha) which was neither peoples' nor democracy. Nor Marxist, nor Leninist. It was a Stalinist tyranny. And Maoist, Pol-Pot, plus a KimIrSen-istic one. I would be very interested in any story you had to share about those times. I agree that these societies never achieved anything resembling what Marx proposed. The remaining communists of today tend to argue that all of past communist movements were not sincere in their motivations. That might very well be true, but even then it is an important piece of information on human nature. If we are trying to get from A - B and we always stumble on the same horrors along the way, maybe the plan is just not viable for this world. So far we have learned that either communism is a terrible idea or communist revolutions always end up being hijacked by sociopaths. To be honest, I think both are true. Capitalism - in my view an advanced form of slavery, following feudalism - started to destroy the entire human experiment on this Globe - way before the warming entered the picture. It never 'faced' a competition of any 'socialistic' challenger. It succumbbed to the authoritarian religious tyrannies (brutal and violent, or just retracting and philosophical). As with communism, there is a big gap between the theory and the implementation. Advanced form of slavery might be a way to put it, but an even more cynical view would be that there's always been slavery to some degree. I believe that the big challenge that we face is how to move to a jobless society. Worse, I think this transition already started but there is still no political will to admit it. Robotics and AI are Marx's worse nightmare. In the limit, the number of employees required by a business will tend to zero, while the ability of a business to provide goods for the rest of us keeps being more and more leveraged by technological advance. One of the realities about the current economic crises that few are willing to admit: there simply are no longer jobs for everyone. I think the best idea that we have so far is the universal flat salary. Best, Telmo. On Fri, Apr 3, 2015 at 4:04 AM, Telmo Menezes te...@telmomenezes.com wrote: On Fri, Apr 3, 2015 at 4:19 AM, LizR lizj...@gmail.com wrote: On 2 April 2015 at 15:18, John Clark johnkcl...@gmail.com wrote: On Wed, Apr 1, 2015 LizR lizj...@gmail.com wrote: In practice Communism was evil but in theory it was just stupid Almost as stupid as capitalism, The defining characteristic of stupid is that stupid doesn't work, so regardless of what you may personally think of capitalism's ethics (and there is no disputing matters of taste) the fact remains that if capitalism was stupider than communism then it wouldn't have won the 40 year long face to face confrontation with it. It didn't. Communism hasn't been tried except at the tribal/village level (you're getting confused because some people called themselves communist). The same claim can be made about anything. Reality never seems to conform to the idealized version of any political theory. Communism has a blueprint, The Communist Manifesto by Marx and Engels. Several societies of varying sizes and cultural backgrounds attempted to implement these ideas. In all cases so far, the results have been horrendous. I have no doubt that this is not the outcome that Marx desired, but there is now strong empirical evidence that this is the outcome you get when applying the idea to societies of human beings. My point is that capitalism is in the process of destroying the world, so it hasn't won anything and may well lose the entire human experiment thanks to the greed of a few short sighted individuals. If the world is indeed being destroyed by pollution, then this is being
Re: Life in the Islamic State for women
Telmo: I have only a few remarks to your (appreciable) response:
you wrote:
.
*What I mean is, when people use the word communism, there is a document
that describes precisely what this word is supposed to mean. A blueprint
for communism.*
That 'document' is obsolete and was idealized' even when formulated. Lenin
(in his theoretical work) tried to save (some of) it and postulated a BRAND
NEW type of humans ('the communist man') unselfish and active up to his
capabilities in the favor (benefit) of mankind (society). He was not to
hopeful about it's realization.
I don't give more credit to the M-E *Socialis*t Bible than to the other
earlier one.
I believe in (some?) advancement over the past 2 centuries, so I would be
careful to draw conclusions upon the ancient pattern (wording?). Today's
'inequality' means haves and havnots, as developed in the capitalistic
world. Havenots not meaning only absolute paupers, rather employees as well
and I am willing to add the very well paid ones. ((A chairman can fire a
CEO etc.)) I contrast them by the OWNERS (of big wealth) - the successors
of the feudal lords. The slave-owners.
Inequality cannot be fixed by re-distribution, it is a system. As long as
people seek jobs to survive with their family as in today's economy, no
re-distribution works.
We have to return to the (original?) M-E ideas of ownership excluded for
all territory, or products of Nature (in-ground, or grown out of ground)
except for the part that is a result of the invested (human's) activity
((work)).
A flat salary is still a salary - not a MINIMUM distribution of the
avalable goods necessary for survival at the level the world can achieve at
any point in time.
Then comes Lenin's super hero (communist man) and works to the top of his
capacity and talents FOR the society, not for a salary. Appreciation
(expressable also in levels of living) may be a 'reward', not an additional
pay.
Such new system requires a new identification of values and activities,
goals and results. I don't think we are ready for such.
At the end you write about jobs (missing for everyone) which is a view
anchored in captialism. In the re-evaluation I mentioned we don't speak
about (paid?) jobs.The entire view has to be different Of course - in
today's terms - technology will soon eliminate the necessity of working
employees for pay and if we cannot change the entire image of societal
survival a mass-famine will strike, only the owners of the technology will
survive, unless the starving crowd finishes them off.
I need someone smarter-than-me to propose the re-evaluation of this world.
And about your flat salary: WHO ON EARTH will assign and supply it?
Of course the owners (HA-HA)
Thanks for your thoughts
On Sat, Apr 4, 2015 at 9:19 AM, Telmo Menezes te...@telmomenezes.com
wrote:
Hi John
On Fri, Apr 3, 2015 at 10:10 PM, John Mikes jami...@gmail.com wrote:
TELMO:
I did not expect from you to point to the 2 centuries old obsolete and
theoretical exercise of Marx-Engels (irrespective of Lenin's intermitted
LATER speculations) as blueprint for a (still?) viable(?) political
system.
I don't think it was ever viable, and I don't think it's relevant to the
current times, as it is based on too many assumption from an era that is
long gone (early Industrialism).
What I mean is, when people use the word communism, there is a document
that describes precisely what this word is supposed to mean. A blueprint
for communism.
I do think that Marx-Engels correctly identified social problems that
remain being problems to this day, namely the self-reinforcing nature of
wealth inequality. The issue is that their proposed solution seems to
equalize society by throwing the majority of people into extreme poverty
and servitude.
It never got further than a tyranny of 'leftish-sounding' slogans by
pretenders. As the original authors dreamed it up, it never (and nowhere)
did get off from the ground.
I know, I lived in a so called Peoples' Democracy (Called 'commi'
system - ha ha) which was neither peoples' nor democracy. Nor Marxist,
nor Leninist.
It was a Stalinist tyranny. And Maoist, Pol-Pot, plus a KimIrSen-istic
one.
I would be very interested in any story you had to share about those times.
I agree that these societies never achieved anything resembling what Marx
proposed. The remaining communists of today tend to argue that all of past
communist movements were not sincere in their motivations. That might very
well be true, but even then it is an important piece of information on
human nature. If we are trying to get from A - B and we always stumble on
the same horrors along the way, maybe the plan is just not viable for this
world. So far we have learned that either communism is a terrible idea or
communist revolutions always end up being hijacked by sociopaths. To be
honest, I think both are true.
Capitalism - in my view an advanced form of slavery, following feudalism
- started to
Re: Life in the Islamic State for women
State capitalism is the economic's of (or was) of communism. State Factor #117 and all that. I am more concerned about political evils and murders committed by the communists. The small scale communism sounds just like the old co-ops of the 20th century, US. Nowadays, modern communism is 100% entwined with Crony Capitalism. Look at China, billionaires, look at Russia, billionaire oligarchs, look at the US, billionaire oligarchs catered to by BHO, and yes, the Koch's for the Republicans, George Soros the Democrats. Are all these systems less bloodthirsty, now that our systems are mixed economies? I don't now. Whatever system we are embedded in, I want it to see to protecting our rights, and our survival. Will it? -Original Message- From: meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net To: everything-list everything-list@googlegroups.com Sent: Sat, Apr 4, 2015 4:16 pm Subject: Re: Life in the Islamic State for women On 4/4/2015 6:19 AM, Telmo Menezes wrote: Hi John On Fri, Apr 3, 2015 at 10:10 PM, John Mikes jami...@gmail.com wrote: TELMO: I did not expect from you to point to the 2 centuries old obsolete and theoretical exercise of Marx-Engels (irrespective of Lenin's intermitted LATER speculations) as blueprint for a (still?) viable(?) political system. I don't think it was ever viable, and I don't think it's relevant to the current times, as it is based on too many assumption from an era that is long gone (early Industrialism). What I mean is, when people use the word communism, there is a document that describes precisely what this word is supposed to mean. A blueprint for communism. I do think that Marx-Engels correctly identified social problems that remain being problems to this day, namely the self-reinforcing nature of wealth inequality. The issue is that their proposed solution seems to equalize society by throwing the majority of people into extreme poverty and servitude. It never got further than a tyranny of 'leftish-sounding' slogans by pretenders. As the original authors dreamed it up, it never (and nowhere) did get off from the ground. I know, I lived in a so called Peoples' Democracy (Called 'commi' system - ha ha) which was neither peoples' nor democracy. Nor Marxist, nor Leninist. It was a Stalinist tyranny. And Maoist, Pol-Pot, plus a KimIrSen-istic one. I would be very interested in any story you had to share about those times. I agree that these societies never achieved anything resembling what Marx proposed. The remaining communists of today tend to argue that all of past communist movements were not sincere in their motivations. That might very well be true, but even then it is an important piece of information on human nature. If we are trying to get from A - B and we always stumble on the same horrors along the way, maybe the plan is just not viable for this world. So far we have learned that either communism is a terrible idea or communist revolutions always end up being hijacked by sociopaths. To be honest, I think both are true. Communism is not a terrible idea - it works fine for families. A lot of political problems come from trying to extend ethics that evolved for families and small tribes to nation states of millions of unrelated people. Capitalism has problems from the same source. Owning a flint spearhead you made is unproblematic. If you own it you can prohibit its use, sell it, bequeath it, etc. But when this idea was extended to owning land it created problems. John Locke thought owning land was an oxymoron...you could only own the temporary use of land. Didn't matter for hunter-gatherers, but it was problem that had to be solved for agricultural society. That now a lot the world's GDP comes from capital has created the same kinds of questions about ownership of capital. Given that rg in Piketty's analysis, is it a good idea to allow the Koch brothers to inherit a billion dollar business (that their father built by drilling for Stalin). Capitalism - in my view an advanced form of slavery, following feudalism - started to destroy the entire human experiment on this Globe - way before the warming entered the picture. It never 'faced' a competition of any 'socialistic' challenger. It succumbbed to the authoritarian religious tyrannies (brutal and violent, or just retracting and philosophical). As with communism, there is a big gap between the theory and the implementation
Re: Life in the Islamic State for women
On 4/4/2015 6:19 AM, Telmo Menezes wrote: Hi John On Fri, Apr 3, 2015 at 10:10 PM, John Mikes jami...@gmail.com mailto:jami...@gmail.com wrote: TELMO: I did not expect from you to point to the 2 centuries old obsolete and theoretical exercise of Marx-Engels (irrespective of Lenin's intermitted LATER speculations) as blueprint for a (still?) viable(?) political system. I don't think it was ever viable, and I don't think it's relevant to the current times, as it is based on too many assumption from an era that is long gone (early Industrialism). What I mean is, when people use the word communism, there is a document that describes precisely what this word is supposed to mean. A blueprint for communism. I do think that Marx-Engels correctly identified social problems that remain being problems to this day, namely the self-reinforcing nature of wealth inequality. The issue is that their proposed solution seems to equalize society by throwing the majority of people into extreme poverty and servitude. It never got further than a tyranny of 'leftish-sounding' slogans by pretenders. As the original authors dreamed it up, it never (and nowhere) did get off from the ground. I know, I lived in a so called Peoples' Democracy (Called 'commi' system - ha ha) which was neither peoples' nor democracy. Nor Marxist, nor Leninist. It was a Stalinist tyranny. And Maoist, Pol-Pot, plus a KimIrSen-istic one. I would be very interested in any story you had to share about those times. I agree that these societies never achieved anything resembling what Marx proposed. The remaining communists of today tend to argue that all of past communist movements were not sincere in their motivations. That might very well be true, but even then it is an important piece of information on human nature. If we are trying to get from A - B and we always stumble on the same horrors along the way, maybe the plan is just not viable for this world. So far we have learned that either communism is a terrible idea or communist revolutions always end up being hijacked by sociopaths. To be honest, I think both are true. Communism is not a terrible idea - it works fine for families. A lot of political problems come from trying to extend ethics that evolved for families and small tribes to nation states of millions of unrelated people. Capitalism has problems from the same source. Owning a flint spearhead you made is unproblematic. If you own it you can prohibit its use, sell it, bequeath it, etc. But when this idea was extended to owning land it created problems. John Locke thought owning land was an oxymoron...you could only own the temporary use of land. Didn't matter for hunter-gatherers, but it was problem that had to be solved for agricultural society. That now a lot the world's GDP comes from capital has created the same kinds of questions about ownership of capital. Given that rg in Piketty's analysis, is it a good idea to allow the Koch brothers to inherit a billion dollar business (that their father built by drilling for Stalin). Capitalism - in my view an advanced form of slavery, following feudalism - started to destroy the entire human experiment on this Globe - way before the warming entered the picture. It never 'faced' a competition of any 'socialistic' challenger. It succumbbed to the authoritarian religious tyrannies (brutal and violent, or just retracting and philosophical). As with communism, there is a big gap between the theory and the implementation. Advanced form of slavery might be a way to put it, but an even more cynical view would be that there's always been slavery to some degree. I believe that the big challenge that we face is how to move to a jobless society. Worse, I think this transition already started but there is still no political will to admit it. Robotics and AI are Marx's worse nightmare. In the limit, the number of employees required by a business will tend to zero, while the ability of a business to provide goods for the rest of us keeps being more and more leveraged by technological advance. One of the realities about the current economic crises that few are willing to admit: there simply are no longer jobs for everyone. I think the best idea that we have so far is the universal flat salary. The trouble with that is that when everyone has the same income nobody feels rich...and people like to feel rich. It's Nietzsche's will to power. So people who have $100 billion don't want to give up $99 billion to the general welfare, even though it would make the world better and make no discernible difference in their life style. So they instead use a few billion to persuade people to vote for politicians who won't tax them. Brent -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop
Re: Life in the Islamic State for women
On Fri, Apr 3, 2015 at 4:04 AM, Telmo Menezes te...@telmomenezes.com wrote: If the world is indeed being destroyed by pollution [...] It's not, things are becoming less polluted, at least in capitalist countries. The amount of sulfur dioxide in the air of London reached its peak around 1850, by 1950 it was one tenth that, today it is one tenth that again. The number of particles in the air reached its peak in 1960, today it is one tenth what it was. Carbon monoxide has been reduced 80% since 1990 and there was a similar reduction in lead compounds; the reduction of nitric oxide has been less dramatic but even here has been cut in half since 1975. Yes the amount of carbon dioxide has increased but that's not necessarily a bad thing. Experiments have shown that the amount of plant biomass increases with approximately the square root of the carbon dioxide abundance in the air, so the 30% increase in CO2 over the last 60 years resulted in a 15% increase in food production and a 15% increase in planet Earth's total biomass. Also, an increase in CO2 makes plants more drought resistant. John K Clark -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Re: Life in the Islamic State for women
On Thu, Apr 2, 2015 at 10:19 PM, LizR lizj...@gmail.com wrote: The defining characteristic of stupid is that stupid doesn't work, so regardless of what you may personally think of capitalism's ethics (and there is no disputing matters of taste) the fact remains that if capitalism was stupider than communism then it wouldn't have won the 40 year long face to face confrontation with it. It didn't. Communism hasn't been tried except at the tribal/village level (you're getting confused because some people called themselves communist). My point is that capitalism is in the process of destroying the world, Are you sure all that bad stuff wasn't caused by people who just called themselves capitalists? And given the fact that people have never been richer, healthier, better educated or more peaceful than the are right now it's a pity nobody started the process of destroying the world thousands of years ago. And why are communist countries like China and former communist countries like the USSR the most polluted part of the planet? John K Clark -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Re: Life in the Islamic State for women
TELMO: I did not expect from you to point to the 2 centuries old obsolete and theoretical exercise of Marx-Engels (irrespective of Lenin's intermitted LATER speculations) as blueprint for a (still?) viable(?) political system. It never got further than a tyranny of 'leftish-sounding' slogans by pretenders. As the original authors dreamed it up, it never (and nowhere) did get off from the ground. I know, I lived in a so called Peoples' Democracy (Called 'commi' system - ha ha) which was neither peoples' nor democracy. Nor Marxist, nor Leninist. It was a Stalinist tyranny. And Maoist, Pol-Pot, plus a KimIrSen-istic one. Capitalism - in my view an advanced form of slavery, following feudalism - started to destroy the entire human experiment on this Globe - way before the warming entered the picture. It never 'faced' a competition of any 'socialistic' challenger. It succumbbed to the authoritarian religious tyrannies (brutal and violent, or just retracting and philosophical). On Fri, Apr 3, 2015 at 4:04 AM, Telmo Menezes te...@telmomenezes.com wrote: On Fri, Apr 3, 2015 at 4:19 AM, LizR lizj...@gmail.com wrote: On 2 April 2015 at 15:18, John Clark johnkcl...@gmail.com wrote: On Wed, Apr 1, 2015 LizR lizj...@gmail.com wrote: In practice Communism was evil but in theory it was just stupid Almost as stupid as capitalism, The defining characteristic of stupid is that stupid doesn't work, so regardless of what you may personally think of capitalism's ethics (and there is no disputing matters of taste) the fact remains that if capitalism was stupider than communism then it wouldn't have won the 40 year long face to face confrontation with it. It didn't. Communism hasn't been tried except at the tribal/village level (you're getting confused because some people called themselves communist). The same claim can be made about anything. Reality never seems to conform to the idealized version of any political theory. Communism has a blueprint, The Communist Manifesto by Marx and Engels. Several societies of varying sizes and cultural backgrounds attempted to implement these ideas. In all cases so far, the results have been horrendous. I have no doubt that this is not the outcome that Marx desired, but there is now strong empirical evidence that this is the outcome you get when applying the idea to societies of human beings. My point is that capitalism is in the process of destroying the world, so it hasn't won anything and may well lose the entire human experiment thanks to the greed of a few short sighted individuals. If the world is indeed being destroyed by pollution, then this is being done by a complex network of cooperation between communist, capitalist and autocratic nations, of which a communist nation is the biggest polluter. Yes, maybe Chinese communism is not what Marx had in mind, but western capitalism is not what the intellectuals who defend capitalism have in mind either. The no true Scotsman brigade will not help us here. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Re: Life in the Islamic State for women
On 2 April 2015 at 15:18, John Clark johnkcl...@gmail.com wrote: On Wed, Apr 1, 2015 LizR lizj...@gmail.com wrote: In practice Communism was evil but in theory it was just stupid Almost as stupid as capitalism, The defining characteristic of stupid is that stupid doesn't work, so regardless of what you may personally think of capitalism's ethics (and there is no disputing matters of taste) the fact remains that if capitalism was stupider than communism then it wouldn't have won the 40 year long face to face confrontation with it. It didn't. Communism hasn't been tried except at the tribal/village level (you're getting confused because some people called themselves communist). My point is that capitalism is in the process of destroying the world, so it hasn't won anything and may well lose the entire human experiment thanks to the greed of a few short sighted individuals. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Re: Life in the Islamic State for women
My guess, Professor Standish, from what I have seen and heard from academics is something of a sympathy for Islamist behavior, For example, the need to explain away Jihad actions, is always cast as possible retaliation for what the US has done or Australia, Israel, Canada, France, New South Wales, whomever the viewed 'occupier-war monger' is. This is the usual 'distancing' language employed. A person may not kneel to Mecca along with the Uma, 5 times a day, but if they both have the same enemies, ideology does makes strange bedfellows, so to speak. This is what I oppose, and consider to be self-destructive to our respective, nation states. Despite my emails, I generally am at least, somewhat intellectual, and nothing of a Luddite, but sort of view the 800 lb. (or kg.) simian in the room, as radical Islam, and not Jimmy Christian, not Vijaya the Magnificent, not Bubba Buddha, Kung Fu Tze, or his smarter, brother, Don Dao. It's the blokes who say the shahaada, first thing in the a.m. that are costing lives now. So, if this is true, what to do? One thing would be for academics to step forward in favor of human rights in the Dar es Salaam, the House of Peace, aka, the Muslim World. Sort of a massive global project. This would be good. But to restate - nobody I know is a jihadist or islamist apologist, not even the muslims I know. -Original Message- From: Russell Standish li...@hpcoders.com.au To: everything-list everything-list@googlegroups.com Sent: Wed, Apr 1, 2015 9:38 pm Subject: Re: Life in the Islamic State for women On Tue, Mar 31, 2015 at 09:27:16AM -0400, spudboy100 via Everything List wrote: Russell, This is because academics, worldwide, tend toward the left, and they tend to it like a religion, but its more an ideology. An ideology being a faith movement. In the US, the academics (nominally all leftists) lean strongly in favor of islamists, worldwide. This could, in part, be that the Saudis (America's best friend!) have thrown their money around to greedy pols. I could send you news reports of the welcoming embrace, and statements of the islamists, but if you're a convinced leftist, you won't budge a millimeter-to quote old, adolf. I have the sales capabilities of maggot and thus, will never be able to sell stocks and bonds or widgets. The people that do like your current Rightist guy, in Australia, are likely not in academia. In the US, this is called flyover country. Your clique are academics, thus everyone you know bends left, and the rest are seen as ignorant rubes. I mean, somebody elected elected Tom Abbot, correct? The general election was more of a protest vote against the previous government, which had become so odious (whether real or perceived), that the majority decided to go with Tony Abbott's lot. Tony Abbott's personal popularity has never been above about 30%, well below the the opposition leader as preferred prime minister. But personal popularity often doesn't have much to do with it, unlike a presidential system, I guess. Yes - someone elected Tony Abbott. The Liberal party of Australia elected him, by one vote over his rival Malcolm Turnbull (a far more popular leader). Since gaining government, Tony Abbott's popularity has sunk dramatically, so much so that the Liberal Party recently voted on a spill motion, which Tony narrowly won (ie was not spilled). We live in interesting times indeed. Yes academic people do tend to be centralist, or progressive, which in the current state of politics lies somewhat left of the Labor party, the traditional leftist party in Australia. But I mix with a variety of people, not just academics, but most tend to be fairly well educated nevertheless. I would say all of them are left of Tony Abbott, however, even though they may be natural Liberal Party supporters. But to restate - nobody I know is a jihadist or islamist apologist, not even the muslims I know. -- Prof Russell Standish Phone 0425 253119 (mobile) Principal, High Performance Coders Visiting Professor of Mathematics hpco...@hpcoders.com.au University of New South Wales http://www.hpcoders.com.au Latest project: The Amoeba's Secret (http://www.hpcoders.com.au/AmoebasSecret.html) -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group
Re: Life in the Islamic State for women
On Wed, Apr 1, 2015 at 2:09 AM, LizR lizj...@gmail.com wrote: As mentioned in another thread, the media have (as it were) blown the Islamic threat up out of all proportion. Climate change is a FAR greater threat to civilisation than ISIS will ever be. That is true. It is also true that ISIS was essentially made possible by the misguided military intervention of the US in the region. So far, the war on terrorism only made the situation worse. The way to fight terrorism is to not be afraid of it. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Re: Life in the Islamic State for women
Sure, Chris. But there comes a time to wake up and smell the coffee. Your psychoanalysis is flattering but irrelevant in a world of rifles and car bombs. You don't agree with what I have said, but what about the behavior of your middle eastern compadres? Speak to what the Uma says (to each other!) and what they do. Sympathizing with a non-modernizing repressive totalitarian system, as much of the Uma's is, is incongruous, at best, for somebody who supports women and gay rights, atheism, and free speech. But this occurs with your team, none the less. We can dissect why, but to what end? Let's just say that we now live in a polarized nation and a polarized world. Anthropologists teach that conflict is the norm for primate cultures like ours, and there is no inducement for resolution. So be it. You have a strange distorted understanding of history as it becomes when squeezed through the toothpaste tube of your ideological optic. You are living proof of the dangers of subjectivism, of how the act of wearing ideological blinders distorts reality into the weird paranoid production your mind perceives. You take partial facts, half-truths, fantastic interpretation and cook up a grand conspiracy in the feverish recesses of your mental reification of reality – as it becomes perceived through your distorted optic. Reality only seems this way to you because this is what your mind’s eye demands it should be. I love my country enough to criticize it; do you? Chris -Original Message- From: 'Chris de Morsella' via Everything List everything-list@googlegroups.com To: everything-list everything-list@googlegroups.com Sent: Tue, Mar 31, 2015 1:08 pm Subject: RE: Life in the Islamic State for women From: everything-list@googlegroups.com [mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com] Sent: Tuesday, March 31, 2015 7:16 AM To: everything-list@googlegroups.com Subject: Re: Life in the Islamic State for women Quentin, sometime its who you are silent about that is an indictment. For example, during the Vietnam conflict, there were mass demonstrations against the war. The leaders of the antiwar movement were never pacifists, but sided with the communists, and especially what the soviets wanted. They never protested against the Soviets hold in eastern europe or soviet funding wars in the middle east, North Korea, or, especially the communist Khmer Rogue in Kapuchea, where a million were massacred, Stalin Style, Mao style. Silent, like the lambs, to paraphrase Hannibal Lecter. These anti-war types, because of their being not pacifists, but communist, in their ideology, remained silent, Similarly, the anti-war peeps of today support the Islamists. For personal example (a minor one) when I perused the IEET site, where in one professor of anthropology, wrote an article on that website, stating that the Hamas war against Israel was a Transhumanist cause. I challenged the fellow on this and pondered what Transhumanists can have in common with Hamas who believes in and enforces Shariah Law (and all that implies). Let us say the examples I raised met with objections there, where John Hughes likes things hard left. I ended up contacting a former manager of that site who confirmed my view (his moderate liberal-libertarian). You have a strange distorted understanding of history as it becomes when squeezed through the toothpaste tube of your ideological optic. You are living proof of the dangers of subjectivism, of how the act of wearing ideological blinders distorts reality into the weird paranoid production your mind perceives. You take partial facts, half-truths, fantastic interpretation and cook up a grand conspiracy in the feverish recesses of your mental reification of reality – as it becomes perceived through your distorted optic. Reality only seems this way to you because this is what your mind’s eye demands it should be. I love my country enough to criticize it; do you? Chris Now you may ask why would leftists who call themselves now, progressives, side with the Islamists? An incomplete explanation is the progressives hope the Islamists knock the crap out of the West, thus, leaving themselves as the beneficiaries of such a civilizational failure. Maybe its a knee-jerk reaction? I don't care anymore, I just view who sides with whom. For instance, there has never been a proposed boycott out of academia against Saudi, Qatar, Iran, Iraq (under Saddam) North Korea, etc. I am not trying to convince you (an impossible task) simply trying to point out the logical incongruity of being good with Islamist totalitarianism. I am surprised that our civilization has not erupted in massive violence, and right now the streets are quiet? -Original Message- From: Quentin Anciaux allco...@gmail.com To: everything-list everything-list@googlegroups.com Sent: Tue, Mar 31, 2015 9:35 am Subject: Re: Life
Re: Life in the Islamic State for women
On Tue, Mar 31, 2015 at 3:35 PM, Quentin Anciaux allco...@gmail.com wrote: 2015-03-31 12:11 GMT+02:00 Telmo Menezes te...@telmomenezes.com: On Tue, Mar 31, 2015 at 11:52 AM, Quentin Anciaux allco...@gmail.com wrote: 2015-03-31 10:37 GMT+02:00 Telmo Menezes te...@telmomenezes.com: On Tue, Mar 31, 2015 at 6:23 AM, Russell Standish li...@hpcoders.com.au wrote: On Thu, Mar 26, 2015 at 07:04:10AM -0400, spudboy100 via Everything List wrote: Well, its not the new jihadists I blame, but the (yes) leftist academics, politicians, and news thugs, that have long, empowered, and made excuses for these aggressors. My suspicion is that they see the jihadists worldwide as being able to topple their shared capitalist enemies. Why else would somebody make excuses, constantly, for jihadists, islamists, and their antidemocratic mindset, anti women, and so forth? The left in all lands serve as the Islamist enablers, and some are billionaires who lean left. Yeah, I know this is divisive, but it's sadly, accurate. Maybe, you left voters could start to vote for nationalist politicians in your countries as a push-back against the jihadist-catering pols, academics, and newsies? You could still be for social justice and spend for it, but coddling the islamists by word and deed would need to be suppressed. They do like modern weaponry, delivered into their hands by allah, to use against the Qufars (all of us). This now includes NBC weapons. In which country are the lefties apologists for jihadists and islamists? It is fairly common in Europe. Hi Quentin, First of all, I don't agree with any of the stuff spudboy wrote, except for this detail. The right-wing in Europe is rather terrible and I have no sympathy for their xenophobic inclinations. Which countries in Europe ? From my personal experience: Portugal, France and Germany. Not so sure about the UK. Because I know no lefties apologists for jihadists and islamists here in Belgium... also if I translate corretly lefties, in french it translates to gauchiste... and it's an insult... don't know if it is in english. I believe the French version has a more negative connotation, while the English one is a mostly neutral nickname. Someone might correct me if I'm wrong. If you equates sympathizer of the palestinian (who often have social/progressive politics preferences, I can admit) as apologists for jihadists and islamists, it's cleary an abuse and bad faith. I agree that this is related to the matter, but what I would say is that some left-leaning people extrapolate their sympathy for the Palestinians to an overall pro-Arab, anti-Israel stance. I don't see it that way... Sure, I'm not accusing you of seeing it that way, and I personally know people who self-identify as left-wingers who don't either. Although I do always notice a certain bias when looking at the Israel-Palestine conflict. please also note that charlie hebdo is what you can call leftist... I don't think they make any secret about it. See above. and it is clearly not pro jihad, or pro religion or whatever pro-religion/fascist related... most of the palestinian sympathizers (from known left or not) are clearly not hamas supporter... Not supporters, but many appear to be apologists. there are some clearly, but they're not common left wing or common in any left parties I know of, even radical left... I know of no radical left (if that's them you're pointing) in belgium and france who are *for* the djihadist and or islamisation of the society... could you provide of such persons/party who clearly states and defends such things ? I didn't claim that they are pro-jihadist. What I claim is that they are apologists. On the Israel-Palestinian conflict they focus on Israel's atrocities, while ignoring the fact that there is an Islamic group on the other side that openly defends the extermination of all jews and regularly organizes attacks against civilians and then uses their own people as human shields to either protect their military bases or obtain more anti-Israel PR. They also tend to defend Islam, which is by far the most nefarious religion in activity these days. I agree that the solution is not to prosecute Islamists, but calling them the religion of peace might be a bit too Orwellian. as it is clearly against any socials or economical ideas of what is called the left. I know, this is what baffles me. A certain tendency of the European left to dislike the USA also helps. So what do you mean by fairly common in Europe ? what left are talking about ? I'm not sure this is related to a type of left, I would say it's more related to the tribal personality type, who likes to be on the side of their group on all matters, no matter what. There are a lot of left-wing people who do not fit this category, of course. I know and am friends with some of them. It is true, for example, that the crimes
Re: Life in the Islamic State for women
As the bedouins say, The dogs bark but the caravan moves on. Meh! -Original Message- From: 'Chris de Morsella' via Everything List everything-list@googlegroups.com To: everything-list everything-list@googlegroups.com Sent: Tue, Mar 31, 2015 3:25 pm Subject: Re: Life in the Islamic State for women From: spudboy100 via Everything List everything-list@googlegroups.com It's simple if you won't accept the perfidies of the Islamist nations/regions and their shariah laws, while viewing the US as the height of evil deeds in the world, there is no bridging this. I don't make up the verifiable truth and really that's all folks, as Porky would frequently say. So now what? Now, we live our lives and wait. Wait for what? For the coming big nasty that's likely going to interfere with our lives. It's like that dumb Leonard Cohen song, We all Know.. I actually can't even parse what you are trying to say here, with your twisted syntax. Let me make it very clear to you Mitch -- I do not in any way shape or form support, sympathize or in any manner condone the actions of psychopath monsters who use Islam as a cover and justification for committing their crimes against humanity. It is both wearisome and insulting that you repeatedly continue attempt to insinuate and suggest that -- *somehow* I must be a sympathizer or supporter of the kind of religious fundamentalism -- that as a non-believer -- it would never even cross my mind to support. Kindly cease and desist with your attempts to spread calumnious lies and falsehoods about me. -Original Message- From: 'Chris de Morsella' via Everything List everything-list@googlegroups.com To: everything-list everything-list@googlegroups.com Sent: Tue, Mar 31, 2015 1:26 pm Subject: RE: Life in the Islamic State for women From: everything-list@googlegroups.com [mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com] Sent: Tuesday, March 31, 2015 9:31 AM To: everything-list@googlegroups.com Subject: Re: Life in the Islamic State for women I feel you are too harsh on your own homeland, Chris, and Israel for that matter. You see our flaws and evils quite profoundly, but are lenient upon the varieties of jihadists abroad in the world today. Excuse me! Show me this alleged “lenience” of mine… show me a single instance where I have been “lenient” (whatever that means) towards the this alleged Islamic menace you keep going on and on about. You are a polemicist Mitch, and you make up stuff about other people; a very bad habit of yours that you should really get a handle on. Can I convince you of this, no, I positively suck as a salesman, an agitprop, a peddler. You may be correct about the horribleness of war, but there are worse things then merely war, and that is war combined with massacre, and massacre caused by religious fanaticism. To the left-mind, the most hideous thing is Christian intolerance and fundamentalism, and misbehaviors of the Islamists, is an understandable evil. To this point, we now have nation now polarized thoroughly. The Left has always (for 40 years) viewed the conservatives as their primary enemy, and behaved as such. Now, the Right has selected BHO as the primary enemy, according to a recent poll. You can never relent on your opinion, and neither will I. That's is likely something for an anthropologist to study. -Original Message- From: 'Chris de Morsella' via Everything List everything-list@googlegroups.com To: everything-list everything-list@googlegroups.com Sent: Tue, Mar 31, 2015 12:07 pm Subject: RE: Life in the Islamic State for women -Original Message- From: everything-list@googlegroups.com [mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Russell Standish Sent: Monday, March 30, 2015 9:23 PM To: everything-list@googlegroups.com Subject: Re: Life in the Islamic State for women On Thu, Mar 26, 2015 at 07:04:10AM -0400, spudboy100 via Everything List wrote: Well, its not the new jihadists I blame, but the (yes
Re: Life in the Islamic State for women
On 1 April 2015 at 20:35, Telmo Menezes te...@telmomenezes.com wrote: The way to fight terrorism is to not be afraid of it. Well, exactly. In practice the War on Terror has mainly been a convenient excuse for western governments to increase their powers substantially, so one wonders who they really see as the enemy. It appears to be us. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Re: Life in the Islamic State for women
On 2 April 2015 at 06:17, John Clark johnkcl...@gmail.com wrote: In practice Communism was evil but in theory it was just stupid Almost as stupid as capitalism, which is currently delivering 99% of the world into slavery and destroying the planet at a rate of knots. In practice, Communism has never been tried (just like free market capitalism. Or free market socialism for that matter, as advocated by Proudhon) -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Re: Life in the Islamic State for women
On Wed, Apr 1, 2015 LizR lizj...@gmail.com wrote: In practice Communism was evil but in theory it was just stupid Almost as stupid as capitalism, The defining characteristic of stupid is that stupid doesn't work, so regardless of what you may personally think of capitalism's ethics (and there is no disputing matters of taste) the fact remains that if capitalism was stupider than communism then it wouldn't have won the 40 year long face to face confrontation with it. And compared with the monstrous horrors of communism the worst crime of the most unethical corporation on the planet is little more than naughty. which is currently delivering 99% of the world into slavery The human race has never been more numerous than it is right now, or been better fed or been better educated or been more peaceful. Oh, or had fewer slaves. and destroying the planet at a rate of knots. And there has never been less disease and people have never been healthier or had longer lives. I guess destroying the planet can be fun! And by the way, the most polluted places on Earth are in the former USSR, China and eastern European countries that were behind the Iron Curtain. John K Clark -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Re: Life in the Islamic State for women
On Tue, Mar 31, 2015 at 09:27:16AM -0400, spudboy100 via Everything List wrote: Russell, This is because academics, worldwide, tend toward the left, and they tend to it like a religion, but its more an ideology. An ideology being a faith movement. In the US, the academics (nominally all leftists) lean strongly in favor of islamists, worldwide. This could, in part, be that the Saudis (America's best friend!) have thrown their money around to greedy pols. I could send you news reports of the welcoming embrace, and statements of the islamists, but if you're a convinced leftist, you won't budge a millimeter-to quote old, adolf. I have the sales capabilities of maggot and thus, will never be able to sell stocks and bonds or widgets. The people that do like your current Rightist guy, in Australia, are likely not in academia. In the US, this is called flyover country. Your clique are academics, thus everyone you know bends left, and the rest are seen as ignorant rubes. I mean, somebody elected elected Tom Abbot, correct? The general election was more of a protest vote against the previous government, which had become so odious (whether real or perceived), that the majority decided to go with Tony Abbott's lot. Tony Abbott's personal popularity has never been above about 30%, well below the the opposition leader as preferred prime minister. But personal popularity often doesn't have much to do with it, unlike a presidential system, I guess. Yes - someone elected Tony Abbott. The Liberal party of Australia elected him, by one vote over his rival Malcolm Turnbull (a far more popular leader). Since gaining government, Tony Abbott's popularity has sunk dramatically, so much so that the Liberal Party recently voted on a spill motion, which Tony narrowly won (ie was not spilled). We live in interesting times indeed. Yes academic people do tend to be centralist, or progressive, which in the current state of politics lies somewhat left of the Labor party, the traditional leftist party in Australia. But I mix with a variety of people, not just academics, but most tend to be fairly well educated nevertheless. I would say all of them are left of Tony Abbott, however, even though they may be natural Liberal Party supporters. But to restate - nobody I know is a jihadist or islamist apologist, not even the muslims I know. -- Prof Russell Standish Phone 0425 253119 (mobile) Principal, High Performance Coders Visiting Professor of Mathematics hpco...@hpcoders.com.au University of New South Wales http://www.hpcoders.com.au Latest project: The Amoeba's Secret (http://www.hpcoders.com.au/AmoebasSecret.html) -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Re: Life in the Islamic State for women
On Tue, Mar 31, 2015 spudboy100 via Everything List everything-list@googlegroups.com wrote: sometime its who you are silent about that is an indictment. Yes, and today I would say that moderate Muslims are guilty of that, assuming that such creatures actually exist and are not as mythical as Bigfoot or Black Gay Republicans. For example, during the Vietnam conflict, there were mass demonstrations against the war. The leaders of the antiwar movement were never pacifists, but sided with the communists, and especially what the soviets wanted. They never protested against the Soviets hold in eastern europe or soviet funding wars in the middle east, North Korea, or, especially the communist Khmer Rogue in Kapuchea, where a million were massacred, Stalin Style, Mao style. That is a very good point. Hitler, Stalin, Mao and Pol Pot were the 4 most evil men of the 20th century, I don't want to get into which of the 4 should take the #1 position because I think it would be tasteless to start arguing that my holocaust was worse than your holocaust, but it's clear that all 4 were dreadful human beings. And yet even today leftists are only comfortable in criticizing one of those 4. I have a theory as to why. Most liberals tend to be academics and the theoretical basis of communism as seen in The Communist Manifesto and Das Kapital may be economic nonsense but it's not obviously evil; I mean who would object to a workers paradise? In practice Communism was evil but in theory it was just stupid, however even in theory the Nazism in Mein Kampf with it's anti-semitism and master race crap was nauseating. Now you may ask why would leftists who call themselves now, progressives, side with the Islamists? An incomplete explanation is the progressives hope the Islamists knock the crap out of the West, thus, leaving themselves as the beneficiaries of such a civilizational failure. Maybe its a knee-jerk reaction? I think it's just knee jerk, somehow they got the idea that to be a good card carrying liberal one must respect all religions even if there is absolutely nothing respectable about them. John K Clark -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
RE: Life in the Islamic State for women
From: everything-list@googlegroups.com [mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of John Clark Sent: Wednesday, April 01, 2015 10:18 AM To: everything-list@googlegroups.com Subject: Re: Life in the Islamic State for women On Tue, Mar 31, 2015 spudboy100 via Everything List everything-list@googlegroups.com wrote: sometime its who you are silent about that is an indictment. Yes, and today I would say that moderate Muslims are guilty of that, assuming that such creatures actually exist and are not as mythical as Bigfoot or Black Gay Republicans. For example, during the Vietnam conflict, there were mass demonstrations against the war. The leaders of the antiwar movement were never pacifists, but sided with the communists, and especially what the soviets wanted. They never protested against the Soviets hold in eastern europe or soviet funding wars in the middle east, North Korea, or, especially the communist Khmer Rogue in Kapuchea, where a million were massacred, Stalin Style, Mao style. That is a very good point. Hitler, Stalin, Mao and Pol Pot were the 4 most evil men of the 20th century, Let us not forget the much more recent genocide that occurred in Rwanda, and how the world essentially stood by and let it happen. Yeah, I know the victims (and the perpetrators were) Africans, living in some far off country, of negligent economic importance or relevance to the set of issues deemed important by the developed world mass media, economic and political centers of power. Chris I don't want to get into which of the 4 should take the #1 position because I think it would be tasteless to start arguing that my holocaust was worse than your holocaust, but it's clear that all 4 were dreadful human beings. And yet even today leftists are only comfortable in criticizing one of those 4. I have a theory as to why. Most liberals tend to be academics and the theoretical basis of communism as seen in The Communist Manifesto and Das Kapital may be economic nonsense but it's not obviously evil; I mean who would object to a workers paradise? In practice Communism was evil but in theory it was just stupid, however even in theory the Nazism in Mein Kampf with it's anti-semitism and master race crap was nauseating. Now you may ask why would leftists who call themselves now, progressives, side with the Islamists? An incomplete explanation is the progressives hope the Islamists knock the crap out of the West, thus, leaving themselves as the beneficiaries of such a civilizational failure. Maybe its a knee-jerk reaction? I think it's just knee jerk, somehow they got the idea that to be a good card carrying liberal one must respect all religions even if there is absolutely nothing respectable about them. John K Clark -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Re: Life in the Islamic State for women
And how many were massacred by the evil regime of Hirohito in China and the POW-camps (both genders)? (not to mention his war against the USA in the Pacific). The war in VietNam is an ignorance of our historians: Kennedy wanted to punish any 'commis' in general and ignorantly attacked the Moskovite Viet-Nam which stood in Mao's way towards India. Mao could not invade a commi country, so he was taken aback at the Viet-Nam borders. He just laughed all the way to the church that the USA took up Viet-Nam and crossed his fingers for Ho-Tchi-Minh's decay so his way clears up in Southern Asia. A US controlled Viet-Nam was no obstacle for him to attack. Unfortunately for him, the US military was too weak to deliver a 'free plate' to Mao. On Wed, Apr 1, 2015 at 1:26 PM, 'Chris de Morsella' via Everything List everything-list@googlegroups.com wrote: *From:* everything-list@googlegroups.com [mailto: everything-list@googlegroups.com] *On Behalf Of *John Clark *Sent:* Wednesday, April 01, 2015 10:18 AM *To:* everything-list@googlegroups.com *Subject:* Re: Life in the Islamic State for women On Tue, Mar 31, 2015 spudboy100 via Everything List everything-list@googlegroups.com wrote: sometime its who you are silent about that is an indictment. Yes, and today I would say that moderate Muslims are guilty of that, assuming that such creatures actually exist and are not as mythical as Bigfoot or Black Gay Republicans. For example, during the Vietnam conflict, there were mass demonstrations against the war. The leaders of the antiwar movement were never pacifists, but sided with the communists, and especially what the soviets wanted. They never protested against the Soviets hold in eastern europe or soviet funding wars in the middle east, North Korea, or, especially the communist Khmer Rogue in Kapuchea, where a million were massacred, Stalin Style, Mao style. That is a very good point. Hitler, Stalin, Mao and Pol Pot were the 4 most evil men of the 20th century, Let us not forget the much more recent genocide that occurred in Rwanda, and how the world essentially stood by and let it happen. Yeah, I know the victims (and the perpetrators were) Africans, living in some far off country, of negligent economic importance or relevance to the set of issues deemed important by the developed world mass media, economic and political centers of power. Chris I don't want to get into which of the 4 should take the #1 position because I think it would be tasteless to start arguing that my holocaust was worse than your holocaust, but it's clear that all 4 were dreadful human beings. And yet even today leftists are only comfortable in criticizing one of those 4. I have a theory as to why. Most liberals tend to be academics and the theoretical basis of communism as seen in The Communist Manifesto and Das Kapital may be economic nonsense but it's not obviously evil; I mean who would object to a workers paradise? In practice Communism was evil but in theory it was just stupid, however even in theory the Nazism in Mein Kampf with it's anti-semitism and master race crap was nauseating. Now you may ask why would leftists who call themselves now, progressives, side with the Islamists? An incomplete explanation is the progressives hope the Islamists knock the crap out of the West, thus, leaving themselves as the beneficiaries of such a civilizational failure. Maybe its a knee-jerk reaction? I think it's just knee jerk, somehow they got the idea that to be a good card carrying liberal one must respect all religions even if there is absolutely nothing respectable about them. John K Clark -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https
Re: Life in the Islamic State for women
Interesting point. What we are experiencing whether intentional of de facto, is the progressives siding with radical Muslims against their home nations. They make excuses for the radical islamists and in academia, try to bend opinion in the islamists favor. They would have been called Fifth Columnists back in the war against Nazism. -Original Message- From: John Clark johnkcl...@gmail.com To: everything-list everything-list@googlegroups.com Sent: Wed, Apr 1, 2015 1:17 pm Subject: Re: Life in the Islamic State for women On Tue, Mar 31, 2015 spudboy100 via Everything List everything-list@googlegroups.com wrote: sometime its who you are silent about that is an indictment. Yes, and today I would say that moderate Muslims are guilty of that, assuming that such creatures actually exist and are not as mythical as Bigfoot or Black Gay Republicans. For example, during the Vietnam conflict, there were mass demonstrations against the war. The leaders of the antiwar movement were never pacifists, but sided with the communists, and especially what the soviets wanted. They never protested against the Soviets hold in eastern europe or soviet funding wars in the middle east, North Korea, or, especially the communist Khmer Rogue in Kapuchea, where a million were massacred, Stalin Style, Mao style. That is a very good point. Hitler, Stalin, Mao and Pol Pot were the 4 most evil men of the 20th century, I don't want to get into which of the 4 should take the #1 position because I think it would be tasteless to start arguing that my holocaust was worse than your holocaust, but it's clear that all 4 were dreadful human beings. And yet even today leftists are only comfortable in criticizing one of those 4. I have a theory as to why. Most liberals tend to be academics and the theoretical basis of communism as seen in The Communist Manifesto and Das Kapital may be economic nonsense but it's not obviously evil; I mean who would object to a workers paradise? In practice Communism was evil but in theory it was just stupid, however even in theory the Nazism in Mein Kampf with it's anti-semitism and master race crap was nauseating. Now you may ask why would leftists who call themselves now, progressives, side with the Islamists? An incomplete explanation is the progressives hope the Islamists knock the crap out of the West, thus, leaving themselves as the beneficiaries of such a civilizational failure. Maybe its a knee-jerk reaction? I think it's just knee jerk, somehow they got the idea that to be a good card carrying liberal one must respect all religions even if there is absolutely nothing respectable about them. John K Clark -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Re: Life in the Islamic State for women
On Tue, Mar 31, 2015 at 6:23 AM, Russell Standish li...@hpcoders.com.au wrote: On Thu, Mar 26, 2015 at 07:04:10AM -0400, spudboy100 via Everything List wrote: Well, its not the new jihadists I blame, but the (yes) leftist academics, politicians, and news thugs, that have long, empowered, and made excuses for these aggressors. My suspicion is that they see the jihadists worldwide as being able to topple their shared capitalist enemies. Why else would somebody make excuses, constantly, for jihadists, islamists, and their antidemocratic mindset, anti women, and so forth? The left in all lands serve as the Islamist enablers, and some are billionaires who lean left. Yeah, I know this is divisive, but it's sadly, accurate. Maybe, you left voters could start to vote for nationalist politicians in your countries as a push-back against the jihadist-catering pols, academics, and newsies? You could still be for social justice and spend for it, but coddling the islamists by word and deed would need to be suppressed. They do like modern weaponry, delivered into their hands by allah, to use against the Qufars (all of us). This now includes NBC weapons. In which country are the lefties apologists for jihadists and islamists? It is fairly common in Europe. Not in mine. Almost everybody I know is a leftie, coz nobody here likes our current rightie PM, but none of them support the IS. -- Prof Russell Standish Phone 0425 253119 (mobile) Principal, High Performance Coders Visiting Professor of Mathematics hpco...@hpcoders.com.au University of New South Wales http://www.hpcoders.com.au Latest project: The Amoeba's Secret (http://www.hpcoders.com.au/AmoebasSecret.html) -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Re: Life in the Islamic State for women
On 31 March 2015 at 23:31, Telmo Menezes te...@telmomenezes.com wrote: Hi Liz, You may be right. I am surely not going to debate that there are a lot of people who were lucky enough to have been born in optimal conditions and feel superior to people who were just less lucky. For this reason, they will support ideas that are just self-serving rationalizations. The problem with left/right polarization, in my opinion, is that it kills critical thought. It is possible to agree with everything you said, but also believe that the strategies traditionally proposed by the left do not work. There are many interesting ideas that are not taken seriously because they fall outside of this dichotomy, for example: - Guaranteed flat income for everyone, no exceptions, no special rules; - A return to a resource-based currency and the end of central banks, thus preventing they highly leveraged investments that generate economical crises and only widen the gap between the rich and the poor; - Deregulation of medicine, recongnizing that there is a trade-off between the protections provided by regulation and the pricing-out of people out of medical care due to barriers to competition introduced by said regulation; - Confronting the lobbies that prevent modern technology from being used to create dirt-cheap, comfortable housing. I agree with you. I'm very sympathetic to anarchist views, which some of the above-mentioned are (more than left wing). I was only arguing for simple empathy for others, which right wingers seem to have deliberately cut themselves off from - to their own detriment as well as others'. I wasn't particularly actually *being* a leftie, but I often get called one for espousing such ideas. But of course real lefties see me as to their right. (I have a similar problem with feminists...) -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Re: Life in the Islamic State for women
2015-03-31 10:37 GMT+02:00 Telmo Menezes te...@telmomenezes.com: On Tue, Mar 31, 2015 at 6:23 AM, Russell Standish li...@hpcoders.com.au wrote: On Thu, Mar 26, 2015 at 07:04:10AM -0400, spudboy100 via Everything List wrote: Well, its not the new jihadists I blame, but the (yes) leftist academics, politicians, and news thugs, that have long, empowered, and made excuses for these aggressors. My suspicion is that they see the jihadists worldwide as being able to topple their shared capitalist enemies. Why else would somebody make excuses, constantly, for jihadists, islamists, and their antidemocratic mindset, anti women, and so forth? The left in all lands serve as the Islamist enablers, and some are billionaires who lean left. Yeah, I know this is divisive, but it's sadly, accurate. Maybe, you left voters could start to vote for nationalist politicians in your countries as a push-back against the jihadist-catering pols, academics, and newsies? You could still be for social justice and spend for it, but coddling the islamists by word and deed would need to be suppressed. They do like modern weaponry, delivered into their hands by allah, to use against the Qufars (all of us). This now includes NBC weapons. In which country are the lefties apologists for jihadists and islamists? It is fairly common in Europe. Which countries in Europe ? Because I know no lefties apologists for jihadists and islamists here in Belgium... also if I translate corretly lefties, in french it translates to gauchiste... and it's an insult... don't know if it is in english. If you equates sympathizer of the palestinian (who often have social/progressive politics preferences, I can admit) as apologists for jihadists and islamists, it's cleary an abuse and bad faith. So what do you mean by fairly common in Europe ? what left are talking about ? Quentin Not in mine. Almost everybody I know is a leftie, coz nobody here likes our current rightie PM, but none of them support the IS. -- Prof Russell Standish Phone 0425 253119 (mobile) Principal, High Performance Coders Visiting Professor of Mathematics hpco...@hpcoders.com.au University of New South Wales http://www.hpcoders.com.au Latest project: The Amoeba's Secret (http://www.hpcoders.com.au/AmoebasSecret.html) -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. -- All those moments will be lost in time, like tears in rain. (Roy Batty/Rutger Hauer) -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Re: Life in the Islamic State for women
On Tue, Mar 31, 2015 at 11:52 AM, Quentin Anciaux allco...@gmail.com wrote: 2015-03-31 10:37 GMT+02:00 Telmo Menezes te...@telmomenezes.com: On Tue, Mar 31, 2015 at 6:23 AM, Russell Standish li...@hpcoders.com.au wrote: On Thu, Mar 26, 2015 at 07:04:10AM -0400, spudboy100 via Everything List wrote: Well, its not the new jihadists I blame, but the (yes) leftist academics, politicians, and news thugs, that have long, empowered, and made excuses for these aggressors. My suspicion is that they see the jihadists worldwide as being able to topple their shared capitalist enemies. Why else would somebody make excuses, constantly, for jihadists, islamists, and their antidemocratic mindset, anti women, and so forth? The left in all lands serve as the Islamist enablers, and some are billionaires who lean left. Yeah, I know this is divisive, but it's sadly, accurate. Maybe, you left voters could start to vote for nationalist politicians in your countries as a push-back against the jihadist-catering pols, academics, and newsies? You could still be for social justice and spend for it, but coddling the islamists by word and deed would need to be suppressed. They do like modern weaponry, delivered into their hands by allah, to use against the Qufars (all of us). This now includes NBC weapons. In which country are the lefties apologists for jihadists and islamists? It is fairly common in Europe. Hi Quentin, First of all, I don't agree with any of the stuff spudboy wrote, except for this detail. The right-wing in Europe is rather terrible and I have no sympathy for their xenophobic inclinations. Which countries in Europe ? From my personal experience: Portugal, France and Germany. Not so sure about the UK. Because I know no lefties apologists for jihadists and islamists here in Belgium... also if I translate corretly lefties, in french it translates to gauchiste... and it's an insult... don't know if it is in english. I believe the French version has a more negative connotation, while the English one is a mostly neutral nickname. Someone might correct me if I'm wrong. If you equates sympathizer of the palestinian (who often have social/progressive politics preferences, I can admit) as apologists for jihadists and islamists, it's cleary an abuse and bad faith. I agree that this is related to the matter, but what I would say is that some left-leaning people extrapolate their sympathy for the Palestinians to an overall pro-Arab, anti-Israel stance. A certain tendency of the European left to dislike the USA also helps. So what do you mean by fairly common in Europe ? what left are talking about ? I'm not sure this is related to a type of left, I would say it's more related to the tribal personality type, who likes to be on the side of their group on all matters, no matter what. There are a lot of left-wing people who do not fit this category, of course. I know and am friends with some of them. It is true, for example, that the crimes of Hamas are completely ignored by the European mainstream press and many intellectuals. Telmo. Quentin Not in mine. Almost everybody I know is a leftie, coz nobody here likes our current rightie PM, but none of them support the IS. -- Prof Russell Standish Phone 0425 253119 (mobile) Principal, High Performance Coders Visiting Professor of Mathematics hpco...@hpcoders.com.au University of New South Wales http://www.hpcoders.com.au Latest project: The Amoeba's Secret (http://www.hpcoders.com.au/AmoebasSecret.html) -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. -- All those moments will be lost in time, like tears in rain. (Roy Batty/Rutger Hauer) -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this
Re: Life in the Islamic State for women
Hi Liz, You may be right. I am surely not going to debate that there are a lot of people who were lucky enough to have been born in optimal conditions and feel superior to people who were just less lucky. For this reason, they will support ideas that are just self-serving rationalizations. The problem with left/right polarization, in my opinion, is that it kills critical thought. It is possible to agree with everything you said, but also believe that the strategies traditionally proposed by the left do not work. There are many interesting ideas that are not taken seriously because they fall outside of this dichotomy, for example: - Guaranteed flat income for everyone, no exceptions, no special rules; - A return to a resource-based currency and the end of central banks, thus preventing they highly leveraged investments that generate economical crises and only widen the gap between the rich and the poor; - Deregulation of medicine, recongnizing that there is a trade-off between the protections provided by regulation and the pricing-out of people out of medical care due to barriers to competition introduced by said regulation; - Confronting the lobbies that prevent modern technology from being used to create dirt-cheap, comfortable housing. I'm not sure if these ideas work in practice, but I am sure that they are not given serious consideration because of the traditional left/right lock-in on critical thought. Telmo. On Tue, Mar 31, 2015 at 12:15 PM, LizR lizj...@gmail.com wrote: After enough online discussions in which I've been called a leftie for various reasons, I have come to the conclusion that someone calling you one means, roughly... That they have no sympathy for any of their fellow humans who might be unfortunate enough to be born into the wrong socio-economic group, and who therefore haven't had the chance to get a decent education (and perhaps not even enough to eat) And because *their* ancestors came from the same continent that first developed science and had an industrial revolution, they consider themselves superior to people whose ancestors came from other continents (the Africans achieved nothing until the Europeans arrived etc etc) And that they refuse to acknowledge how lucky they are to have been born into the socio-economic group they were, in the country they were, to the parents they were, and to have the education and genes they have, which they consider to somehow be something they have achieved rather than the sheer luck it actually is. And that, despite their entire lives having been blessed by the good fortune of having been born the right person in the right place at the right time, they don't wish to share anything with anyone less fortunate than themselves, because those people haven't earned the right to partake of their privileges. That appears to be the position of people who call you a leftie. It's basically their excuse not to act like decent human beings. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Re: Life in the Islamic State for women
After enough online discussions in which I've been called a leftie for various reasons, I have come to the conclusion that someone calling you one means, roughly... That they have no sympathy for any of their fellow humans who might be unfortunate enough to be born into the wrong socio-economic group, and who therefore haven't had the chance to get a decent education (and perhaps not even enough to eat) And because *their* ancestors came from the same continent that first developed science and had an industrial revolution, they consider themselves superior to people whose ancestors came from other continents (the Africans achieved nothing until the Europeans arrived etc etc) And that they refuse to acknowledge how lucky they are to have been born into the socio-economic group they were, in the country they were, to the parents they were, and to have the education and genes they have, which they consider to somehow be something they have achieved rather than the sheer luck it actually is. And that, despite their entire lives having been blessed by the good fortune of having been born the right person in the right place at the right time, they don't wish to share anything with anyone less fortunate than themselves, because those people haven't earned the right to partake of their privileges. That appears to be the position of people who call you a leftie. It's basically their excuse not to act like decent human beings. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Re: Life in the Islamic State for women
Quentin, sometime its who you are silent about that is an indictment. For example, during the Vietnam conflict, there were mass demonstrations against the war. The leaders of the antiwar movement were never pacifists, but sided with the communists, and especially what the soviets wanted. They never protested against the Soviets hold in eastern europe or soviet funding wars in the middle east, North Korea, or, especially the communist Khmer Rogue in Kapuchea, where a million were massacred, Stalin Style, Mao style. Silent, like the lambs, to paraphrase Hannibal Lecter. These anti-war types, because of their being not pacifists, but communist, in their ideology, remained silent, Similarly, the anti-war peeps of today support the Islamists. For personal example (a minor one) when I perused the IEET site, where in one professor of anthropology, wrote an article on that website, stating that the Hamas war against Israel was a Transhumanist cause. I challenged the fellow on this and pondered what Transhumanists can have in common with Hamas who believes in and enforces Shariah Law (and all that implies). Let us say the examples I raised met with objections there, where John Hughes likes things hard left. I ended up contacting a former manager of that site who confirmed my view (his moderate liberal-libertarian). Now you may ask why would leftists who call themselves now, progressives, side with the Islamists? An incomplete explanation is the progressives hope the Islamists knock the crap out of the West, thus, leaving themselves as the beneficiaries of such a civilizational failure. Maybe its a knee-jerk reaction? I don't care anymore, I just view who sides with whom. For instance, there has never been a proposed boycott out of academia against Saudi, Qatar, Iran, Iraq (under Saddam) North Korea, etc. I am not trying to convince you (an impossible task) simply trying to point out the logical incongruity of being good with Islamist totalitarianism. I am surprised that our civilization has not erupted in massive violence, and right now the streets are quiet? -Original Message- From: Quentin Anciaux allco...@gmail.com To: everything-list everything-list@googlegroups.com Sent: Tue, Mar 31, 2015 9:35 am Subject: Re: Life in the Islamic State for women 2015-03-31 12:11 GMT+02:00 Telmo Menezes te...@telmomenezes.com: On Tue, Mar 31, 2015 at 11:52 AM, Quentin Anciaux allco...@gmail.com wrote: 2015-03-31 10:37 GMT+02:00 Telmo Menezes te...@telmomenezes.com: On Tue, Mar 31, 2015 at 6:23 AM, Russell Standish li...@hpcoders.com.au wrote: On Thu, Mar 26, 2015 at 07:04:10AM -0400, spudboy100 via Everything List wrote: Well, its not the new jihadists I blame, but the (yes) leftist academics, politicians, and news thugs, that have long, empowered, and made excuses for these aggressors. My suspicion is that they see the jihadists worldwide as being able to topple their shared capitalist enemies. Why else would somebody make excuses, constantly, for jihadists, islamists, and their antidemocratic mindset, anti women, and so forth? The left in all lands serve as the Islamist enablers, and some are billionaires who lean left. Yeah, I know this is divisive, but it's sadly, accurate. Maybe, you left voters could start to vote for nationalist politicians in your countries as a push-back against the jihadist-catering pols, academics, and newsies? You could still be for social justice and spend for it, but coddling the islamists by word and deed would need to be suppressed. They do like modern weaponry, delivered into their hands by allah, to use against the Qufars (all of us). This now includes NBC weapons. In which country are the lefties apologists for jihadists and islamists? It is fairly common in Europe. Hi Quentin, First of all, I don't agree with any of the stuff spudboy wrote, except for this detail. The right-wing in Europe is rather terrible and I have no sympathy for their xenophobic inclinations. Which countries in Europe ? From my personal experience: Portugal, France
RE: Life in the Islamic State for women
From: everything-list@googlegroups.com [mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com] Sent: Tuesday, March 31, 2015 7:16 AM To: everything-list@googlegroups.com Subject: Re: Life in the Islamic State for women Quentin, sometime its who you are silent about that is an indictment. For example, during the Vietnam conflict, there were mass demonstrations against the war. The leaders of the antiwar movement were never pacifists, but sided with the communists, and especially what the soviets wanted. They never protested against the Soviets hold in eastern europe or soviet funding wars in the middle east, North Korea, or, especially the communist Khmer Rogue in Kapuchea, where a million were massacred, Stalin Style, Mao style. Silent, like the lambs, to paraphrase Hannibal Lecter. These anti-war types, because of their being not pacifists, but communist, in their ideology, remained silent, Similarly, the anti-war peeps of today support the Islamists. For personal example (a minor one) when I perused the IEET site, where in one professor of anthropology, wrote an article on that website, stating that the Hamas war against Israel was a Transhumanist cause. I challenged the fellow on this and pondered what Transhumanists can have in common with Hamas who believes in and enforces Shariah Law (and all that implies). Let us say the examples I raised met with objections there, where John Hughes likes things hard left. I ended up contacting a former manager of that site who confirmed my view (his moderate liberal-libertarian). You have a strange distorted understanding of history as it becomes when squeezed through the toothpaste tube of your ideological optic. You are living proof of the dangers of subjectivism, of how the act of wearing ideological blinders distorts reality into the weird paranoid production your mind perceives. You take partial facts, half-truths, fantastic interpretation and cook up a grand conspiracy in the feverish recesses of your mental reification of reality – as it becomes perceived through your distorted optic. Reality only seems this way to you because this is what your mind’s eye demands it should be. I love my country enough to criticize it; do you? Chris Now you may ask why would leftists who call themselves now, progressives, side with the Islamists? An incomplete explanation is the progressives hope the Islamists knock the crap out of the West, thus, leaving themselves as the beneficiaries of such a civilizational failure. Maybe its a knee-jerk reaction? I don't care anymore, I just view who sides with whom. For instance, there has never been a proposed boycott out of academia against Saudi, Qatar, Iran, Iraq (under Saddam) North Korea, etc. I am not trying to convince you (an impossible task) simply trying to point out the logical incongruity of being good with Islamist totalitarianism. I am surprised that our civilization has not erupted in massive violence, and right now the streets are quiet? -Original Message- From: Quentin Anciaux allco...@gmail.com To: everything-list everything-list@googlegroups.com Sent: Tue, Mar 31, 2015 9:35 am Subject: Re: Life in the Islamic State for women 2015-03-31 12:11 GMT+02:00 Telmo Menezes te...@telmomenezes.com: On Tue, Mar 31, 2015 at 11:52 AM, Quentin Anciaux allco...@gmail.com wrote: 2015-03-31 10:37 GMT+02:00 Telmo Menezes te...@telmomenezes.com: On Tue, Mar 31, 2015 at 6:23 AM, Russell Standish li...@hpcoders.com.au wrote: On Thu, Mar 26, 2015 at 07:04:10AM -0400, spudboy100 via Everything List wrote: Well, its not the new jihadists I blame, but the (yes) leftist academics, politicians, and news thugs, that have long, empowered, and made excuses for these aggressors. My suspicion is that they see the jihadists worldwide as being able to topple their shared capitalist enemies. Why else would somebody make excuses, constantly, for jihadists, islamists, and their antidemocratic mindset, anti women, and so forth? The left in all lands serve as the Islamist enablers, and some are billionaires who lean left. Yeah, I know this is divisive, but it's sadly, accurate. Maybe, you left voters could start to vote for nationalist politicians in your countries as a push-back against the jihadist-catering pols, academics, and newsies? You could still be for social justice and spend for it, but coddling the islamists by word and deed would need to be suppressed. They do like modern weaponry, delivered into their hands by allah, to use against the Qufars (all of us). This now includes NBC weapons. In which country are the lefties apologists for jihadists and islamists? It is fairly common in Europe. Hi Quentin, First of all, I don't agree with any of the stuff spudboy wrote, except for this detail. The right-wing in Europe is rather terrible and I have no sympathy for their xenophobic inclinations. Which countries
Re: Life in the Islamic State for women
I feel you are too harsh on your own homeland, Chris, and Israel for that matter. You see our flaws and evils quite profoundly, but are lenient upon the varieties of jihadists abroad in the world today. Can I convince you of this, no, I positively suck as a salesman, an agitprop, a peddler. You may be correct about the horribleness of war, but there are worse things then merely war, and that is war combined with massacre, and massacre caused by religious fanaticism. To the left-mind, the most hideous thing is Christian intolerance and fundamentalism, and misbehaviors of the Islamists, is an understandable evil. To this point, we now have nation now polarized thoroughly. The Left has always (for 40 years) viewed the conservatives as their primary enemy, and behaved as such. Now, the Right has selected BHO as the primary enemy, according to a recent poll. You can never relent on your opinion, and neither will I. That's is likely something for an anthropologist to study. -Original Message- From: 'Chris de Morsella' via Everything List everything-list@googlegroups.com To: everything-list everything-list@googlegroups.com Sent: Tue, Mar 31, 2015 12:07 pm Subject: RE: Life in the Islamic State for women -Original Message- From: everything-list@googlegroups.com [mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Russell Standish Sent: Monday, March 30, 2015 9:23 PM To: everything-list@googlegroups.com Subject: Re: Life in the Islamic State for women On Thu, Mar 26, 2015 at 07:04:10AM -0400, spudboy100 via Everything List wrote: Well, its not the new jihadists I blame, but the (yes) leftist academics, politicians, and news thugs, that have long, empowered, and made excuses for these aggressors. My suspicion is that they see the jihadists worldwide as being able to topple their shared capitalist enemies. Why else would somebody make excuses, constantly, for jihadists, islamists, and their antidemocratic mindset, anti women, and so forth? The left in all lands serve as the Islamist enablers, and some are billionaires who lean left. Yeah, I know this is divisive, but it's sadly, accurate. Maybe, you left voters could start to vote for nationalist politicians in your countries as a push-back against the jihadist-catering pols, academics, and newsies? You could still be for social justice and spend for it, but coddling the islamists by word and deed would need to be suppressed. They do like modern weaponry, delivered into their hands by allah, to use against the Qufars (all of us). This now includes NBC weapons. In which country are the lefties apologists for jihadists and islamists? Not in mine. Almost everybody I know is a leftie, coz nobody here likes our current rightie PM, but none of them support the IS. In my opinion the only people who support the IS are the fundamentalist psychopaths who have become drawn to it in the first place and the war mongers -- especially in the US and Israel, who are working in one capacity or another, for the war sector, for the MIC, which views the IS as a nice PR entity to notch up support for another ten years of a perpetual state of war -- and hence lock in future revenue streams for this highly privileged sector of our highly distorted and definitely NOT free market economy. Chris -- Prof Russell Standish Phone 0425 253119 (mobile) Principal, High Performance Coders Visiting Professor of Mathematics hpco...@hpcoders.com.au University of New South Wales http://www.hpcoders.com.au Latest project: The Amoeba's Secret (http://www.hpcoders.com.au/AmoebasSecret.html) -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http
RE: Life in the Islamic State for women
-Original Message- From: everything-list@googlegroups.com [mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Russell Standish Sent: Monday, March 30, 2015 9:23 PM To: everything-list@googlegroups.com Subject: Re: Life in the Islamic State for women On Thu, Mar 26, 2015 at 07:04:10AM -0400, spudboy100 via Everything List wrote: Well, its not the new jihadists I blame, but the (yes) leftist academics, politicians, and news thugs, that have long, empowered, and made excuses for these aggressors. My suspicion is that they see the jihadists worldwide as being able to topple their shared capitalist enemies. Why else would somebody make excuses, constantly, for jihadists, islamists, and their antidemocratic mindset, anti women, and so forth? The left in all lands serve as the Islamist enablers, and some are billionaires who lean left. Yeah, I know this is divisive, but it's sadly, accurate. Maybe, you left voters could start to vote for nationalist politicians in your countries as a push-back against the jihadist-catering pols, academics, and newsies? You could still be for social justice and spend for it, but coddling the islamists by word and deed would need to be suppressed. They do like modern weaponry, delivered into their hands by allah, to use against the Qufars (all of us). This now includes NBC weapons. In which country are the lefties apologists for jihadists and islamists? Not in mine. Almost everybody I know is a leftie, coz nobody here likes our current rightie PM, but none of them support the IS. In my opinion the only people who support the IS are the fundamentalist psychopaths who have become drawn to it in the first place and the war mongers -- especially in the US and Israel, who are working in one capacity or another, for the war sector, for the MIC, which views the IS as a nice PR entity to notch up support for another ten years of a perpetual state of war -- and hence lock in future revenue streams for this highly privileged sector of our highly distorted and definitely NOT free market economy. Chris -- Prof Russell Standish Phone 0425 253119 (mobile) Principal, High Performance Coders Visiting Professor of Mathematics hpco...@hpcoders.com.au University of New South Wales http://www.hpcoders.com.au Latest project: The Amoeba's Secret (http://www.hpcoders.com.au/AmoebasSecret.html) -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Re: Life in the Islamic State for women
From: spudboy100 via Everything List everything-list@googlegroups.com
It's simple if you won't accept the perfidies of the Islamist nations/regions
and their shariah laws, while viewing the US as the height of evil deeds in the
world, there is no bridging this. I don't make up the verifiable truth and
really that's all folks, as Porky would frequently say. So now what? Now, we
live our lives and wait. Wait for what? For the coming big nasty that's likely
going to interfere with our lives. It's like that dumb Leonard Cohen song, We
all Know..
I actually can't even parse what you are trying to say here, with your twisted
syntax. Let me make it very clear to you Mitch -- I do not in any way shape or
form support, sympathize or in any manner condone the actions of psychopath
monsters who use Islam as a cover and justification for committing their crimes
against humanity.
It is both wearisome and insulting that you repeatedly continue attempt to
insinuate and suggest that -- *somehow* I must be a sympathizer or supporter of
the kind of religious fundamentalism -- that as a non-believer -- it would
never even cross my mind to support.
Kindly cease and desist with your attempts to spread calumnious lies and
falsehoods about me.
-Original Message-
From: 'Chris de Morsella' via Everything List everything-list@googlegroups.com
To: everything-list everything-list@googlegroups.com
Sent: Tue, Mar 31, 2015 1:26 pm
Subject: RE: Life in the Islamic State for women
#yiv3718273722 #yiv3718273722AOLMsgPart_2_e23c673a-0e91-471c-b68d-63f8dfcb3d5f
td{color:black;} _filtered #yiv3718273722 {font-family:Calibri;panose-1:2 15 5
2 2 2 4 3 2 4;} _filtered #yiv3718273722 {font-family:Tahoma;panose-1:2 11 6 4
3 5 4 4 2 4;} _filtered #yiv3718273722 {font-family:Consolas;panose-1:2 11 6 9
2 2 4 3 2 4;}#yiv3718273722 .yiv3718273722aolReplacedBody
p.yiv3718273722MsoNormal, #yiv3718273722 .yiv3718273722aolReplacedBody
li.yiv3718273722MsoNormal, #yiv3718273722 .yiv3718273722aolReplacedBody
div.yiv3718273722MsoNormal
{margin:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;font-size:12.0pt;}#yiv3718273722
.yiv3718273722aolReplacedBody a:link, #yiv3718273722
.yiv3718273722aolReplacedBody span.yiv3718273722MsoHyperlink
{color:blue;text-decoration:underline;}#yiv3718273722
.yiv3718273722aolReplacedBody a:visited, #yiv3718273722
.yiv3718273722aolReplacedBody span.yiv3718273722MsoHyperlinkFollowed
{color:purple;text-decoration:underline;}#yiv3718273722
.yiv3718273722aolReplacedBody p
{margin-right:0in;margin-left:0in;font-size:12.0pt;}#yiv3718273722
.yiv3718273722aolReplacedBody pre
{margin:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;font-size:10.0pt;}#yiv3718273722
.yiv3718273722aolReplacedBody tt {}#yiv3718273722 .yiv3718273722aolReplacedBody
p.yiv3718273722MsoAcetate, #yiv3718273722 .yiv3718273722aolReplacedBody
li.yiv3718273722MsoAcetate, #yiv3718273722 .yiv3718273722aolReplacedBody
div.yiv3718273722MsoAcetate
{margin:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;font-size:8.0pt;}#yiv3718273722
.yiv3718273722aolReplacedBody span.yiv3718273722HTMLPreformattedChar
{font-family:Consolas;}#yiv3718273722 .yiv3718273722aolReplacedBody
span.yiv3718273722EmailStyle21 {color:#1F497D;}#yiv3718273722
.yiv3718273722aolReplacedBody span.yiv3718273722BalloonTextChar
{}#yiv3718273722 .yiv3718273722aolReplacedBody .yiv3718273722MsoChpDefault {}
_filtered #yiv3718273722 {margin:1.0in 1.0in 1.0in 1.0in;}#yiv3718273722
.yiv3718273722aolReplacedBody div.yiv3718273722WordSection1 {} From:
everything-list@googlegroups.com [mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com]
Sent: Tuesday, March 31, 2015 9:31 AM
To: everything-list@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: Life in the Islamic State for women I feel you are too harsh on
your own homeland, Chris, and Israel for that matter. You see our flaws and
evils quite profoundly, but are lenient upon the varieties of jihadists abroad
in the world today. Excuse me! Show me this alleged “lenience” of mine… show
me a single instance where I have been “lenient” (whatever that means) towards
the this alleged Islamic menace you keep going on and on about. You are a
polemicist Mitch, and you make up stuff about other people; a very bad habit of
yours that you should really get a handle on. Can I convince you of this, no,
I positively suck as a salesman, an agitprop, a peddler. You may be correct
about the horribleness of war, but there are worse things then merely war, and
that is war combined with massacre, and massacre caused by religious
fanaticism. To the left-mind, the most hideous thing is Christian intolerance
and fundamentalism, and misbehaviors of the Islamists, is an understandable
evil. To this point, we now have nation now polarized thoroughly. The Left has
always (for 40 years) viewed the conservatives as their primary enemy, and
behaved as such. Now, the Right has selected BHO as the primary enemy,
according to a recent poll. You can never relent on your opinion, and neither
will I. That's
Re: Life in the Islamic State for women
It's simple if you won't accept the perfidies of the Islamist nations/regions and their shariah laws, while viewing the US as the height of evil deeds in the world, there is no bridging this. I don't make up the verifiable truth and really that's all folks, as Porky would frequently say. So now what? Now, we live our lives and wait. Wait for what? For the coming big nasty that's likely going to interfere with our lives. It's like that dumb Leonard Cohen song, We all Know.. -Original Message- From: 'Chris de Morsella' via Everything List everything-list@googlegroups.com To: everything-list everything-list@googlegroups.com Sent: Tue, Mar 31, 2015 1:26 pm Subject: RE: Life in the Islamic State for women From: everything-list@googlegroups.com [mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com] Sent: Tuesday, March 31, 2015 9:31 AM To: everything-list@googlegroups.com Subject: Re: Life in the Islamic State for women I feel you are too harsh on your own homeland, Chris, and Israel for that matter. You see our flaws and evils quite profoundly, but are lenient upon the varieties of jihadists abroad in the world today. Excuse me! Show me this alleged “lenience” of mine… show me a single instance where I have been “lenient” (whatever that means) towards the this alleged Islamic menace you keep going on and on about. You are a polemicist Mitch, and you make up stuff about other people; a very bad habit of yours that you should really get a handle on. Can I convince you of this, no, I positively suck as a salesman, an agitprop, a peddler. You may be correct about the horribleness of war, but there are worse things then merely war, and that is war combined with massacre, and massacre caused by religious fanaticism. To the left-mind, the most hideous thing is Christian intolerance and fundamentalism, and misbehaviors of the Islamists, is an understandable evil. To this point, we now have nation now polarized thoroughly. The Left has always (for 40 years) viewed the conservatives as their primary enemy, and behaved as such. Now, the Right has selected BHO as the primary enemy, according to a recent poll. You can never relent on your opinion, and neither will I. That's is likely something for an anthropologist to study. -Original Message- From: 'Chris de Morsella' via Everything List everything-list@googlegroups.com To: everything-list everything-list@googlegroups.com Sent: Tue, Mar 31, 2015 12:07 pm Subject: RE: Life in the Islamic State for women -Original Message- From: everything-list@googlegroups.com [mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Russell Standish Sent: Monday, March 30, 2015 9:23 PM To: everything-list@googlegroups.com Subject: Re: Life in the Islamic State for women On Thu, Mar 26, 2015 at 07:04:10AM -0400, spudboy100 via Everything List wrote: Well, its not the new jihadists I blame, but the (yes) leftist academics, politicians, and news thugs, that have long, empowered, and made excuses for these aggressors. My suspicion is that they see the jihadists worldwide as being able to topple their shared capitalist enemies. Why else would somebody make excuses, constantly, for jihadists, islamists, and their antidemocratic mindset, anti women, and so forth? The left in all lands serve as the Islamist enablers, and some are billionaires who lean left. Yeah, I know this is divisive, but it's sadly, accurate. Maybe, you left voters could start to vote for nationalist politicians in your countries as a push-back against the jihadist-catering pols, academics, and newsies? You could still be for social justice and spend for it, but coddling the islamists by word and deed would need to be suppressed. They do like modern weaponry, delivered into their hands by allah, to use against the Qufars (all of us). This now includes NBC weapons. In which country are the lefties apologists for jihadists and islamists? Not in mine. Almost everybody I know is a leftie, coz nobody here likes our current rightie PM, but none of them support the IS. In my opinion the only people who support the IS are the fundamentalist psychopaths who have become drawn to it in the first place and the war mongers -- especially in the US and Israel, who are working in one capacity or another, for the war sector, for the MIC, which views the IS as a nice PR entity to notch up support for another ten years of a perpetual state of war -- and hence lock in future revenue streams for this highly privileged sector of our highly distorted and definitely NOT free market economy. Chris -- Prof Russell Standish
Re: Life in the Islamic State for women
On 3/31/2015 3:31 AM, Telmo Menezes wrote: Hi Liz, You may be right. I am surely not going to debate that there are a lot of people who were lucky enough to have been born in optimal conditions and feel superior to people who were just less lucky. For this reason, they will support ideas that are just self-serving rationalizations. The problem with left/right polarization, in my opinion, is that it kills critical thought. It is possible to agree with everything you said, but also believe that the strategies traditionally proposed by the left do not work. There are many interesting ideas that are not taken seriously because they fall outside of this dichotomy, for example: - Guaranteed flat income for everyone, no exceptions, no special rules; I like that's well within the left camp. - A return to a resource-based currency and the end of central banks, thus preventing they highly leveraged investments that generate economical crises and only widen the gap between the rich and the poor; Leverage investments (essentially creating money) does a lot to stimulate economic and technical development too. - Deregulation of medicine, recongnizing that there is a trade-off between the protections provided by regulation and the pricing-out of people out of medical care due to barriers to competition introduced by said regulation; The barriers are to competition in production, i.e. patents. Without those barriers there would be much less incentive for development and research - which is wide open for competition, but very expensive. - Confronting the lobbies that prevent modern technology from being used to create dirt-cheap, comfortable housing. Moderns technology already has created dirt-cheap, comfortable housing - it's called a mobile home (or house trailer). The problem with dirt-cheap is that dirt isn't cheap. A home lot in Santa Monica, with a falling down house on it, goes for about 750K$. I'm not sure if these ideas work in practice, but I am sure that they are not given serious consideration because of the traditional left/right lock-in on critical thought. I'm not so sure that it's a lock on critical thought rather than a lock on political campaign funding. Brent -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Re: Life in the Islamic State for women
On 3/31/2015 3:55 AM, LizR wrote: On 31 March 2015 at 23:31, Telmo Menezes te...@telmomenezes.com mailto:te...@telmomenezes.com wrote: Hi Liz, You may be right. I am surely not going to debate that there are a lot of people who were lucky enough to have been born in optimal conditions and feel superior to people who were just less lucky. For this reason, they will support ideas that are just self-serving rationalizations. The problem with left/right polarization, in my opinion, is that it kills critical thought. It is possible to agree with everything you said, but also believe that the strategies traditionally proposed by the left do not work. There are many interesting ideas that are not taken seriously because they fall outside of this dichotomy, for example: - Guaranteed flat income for everyone, no exceptions, no special rules; - A return to a resource-based currency and the end of central banks, thus preventing they highly leveraged investments that generate economical crises and only widen the gap between the rich and the poor; - Deregulation of medicine, recongnizing that there is a trade-off between the protections provided by regulation and the pricing-out of people out of medical care due to barriers to competition introduced by said regulation; - Confronting the lobbies that prevent modern technology from being used to create dirt-cheap, comfortable housing. I agree with you. I'm very sympathetic to anarchist views, which some of the above-mentioned are (more than left wing). I was only arguing for simple empathy for others, which right wingers seem to have deliberately cut themselves off from - to their own detriment as well as others'. I wasn't particularly actually /being/ a leftie, but I often get called one for espousing such ideas. But of course real lefties see me as to their right. (I have a similar problem with feminists...) The right-wing in the U.S. seems to be a syncretic alliance of conservative authoritarians whose main purpose is maintain and even reenforce all existing hierarchies (rich over poor, white over black, men over women,...) and the libertarian individualists who just oppose government as a intrusion on freedom. They became allied because FDR's New Deal and LBJ's Civil Rights act were both attempts by the federal government to upset hierarchies and restrict the freedom of the haves to keep the have-nots down. The economic conservatives hated them because it threatened the power of the capitalist to exploit labor. The social conservatives hated them because it threatened their superior social status relative to blacks, browns, jews, atheists,... The libertarians hated them because they were coercive government actions that restricted freedom - even if it was freedom to be assholes. Brent Brent -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
RE: Life in the Islamic State for women
From: everything-list@googlegroups.com [mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com] Sent: Tuesday, March 31, 2015 9:31 AM To: everything-list@googlegroups.com Subject: Re: Life in the Islamic State for women I feel you are too harsh on your own homeland, Chris, and Israel for that matter. You see our flaws and evils quite profoundly, but are lenient upon the varieties of jihadists abroad in the world today. Excuse me! Show me this alleged “lenience” of mine… show me a single instance where I have been “lenient” (whatever that means) towards the this alleged Islamic menace you keep going on and on about. You are a polemicist Mitch, and you make up stuff about other people; a very bad habit of yours that you should really get a handle on. Can I convince you of this, no, I positively suck as a salesman, an agitprop, a peddler. You may be correct about the horribleness of war, but there are worse things then merely war, and that is war combined with massacre, and massacre caused by religious fanaticism. To the left-mind, the most hideous thing is Christian intolerance and fundamentalism, and misbehaviors of the Islamists, is an understandable evil. To this point, we now have nation now polarized thoroughly. The Left has always (for 40 years) viewed the conservatives as their primary enemy, and behaved as such. Now, the Right has selected BHO as the primary enemy, according to a recent poll. You can never relent on your opinion, and neither will I. That's is likely something for an anthropologist to study. -Original Message- From: 'Chris de Morsella' via Everything List everything-list@googlegroups.com To: everything-list everything-list@googlegroups.com Sent: Tue, Mar 31, 2015 12:07 pm Subject: RE: Life in the Islamic State for women -Original Message- From: everything-list@googlegroups.com [mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com? ] On Behalf Of Russell Standish Sent: Monday, March 30, 2015 9:23 PM To: everything-list@googlegroups.com Subject: Re: Life in the Islamic State for women On Thu, Mar 26, 2015 at 07:04:10AM -0400, spudboy100 via Everything List wrote: Well, its not the new jihadists I blame, but the (yes) leftist academics, politicians, and news thugs, that have long, empowered, and made excuses for these aggressors. My suspicion is that they see the jihadists worldwide as being able to topple their shared capitalist enemies. Why else would somebody make excuses, constantly, for jihadists, islamists, and their antidemocratic mindset, anti women, and so forth? The left in all lands serve as the Islamist enablers, and some are billionaires who lean left. Yeah, I know this is divisive, but it's sadly, accurate. Maybe, you left voters could start to vote for nationalist politicians in your countries as a push-back against the jihadist-catering pols, academics, and newsies? You could still be for social justice and spend for it, but coddling the islamists by word and deed would need to be suppressed. They do like modern weaponry, delivered into their hands by allah, to use against the Qufars (all of us). This now includes NBC weapons. In which country are the lefties apologists for jihadists and islamists? Not in mine. Almost everybody I know is a leftie, coz nobody here likes our current rightie PM, but none of them support the IS. In my opinion the only people who support the IS are the fundamentalist psychopaths who have become drawn to it in the first place and the war mongers -- especially in the US and Israel, who are working in one capacity or another, for the war sector, for the MIC, which views the IS as a nice PR entity to notch up support for another ten years of a perpetual state of war -- and hence lock in future revenue streams for this highly privileged sector of our highly distorted and definitely NOT free market economy. Chris -- Prof Russell Standish Phone 0425 253119 (mobile) Principal, High Performance Coders Visiting Professor of Mathematics hpco...@hpcoders.com.au University of New South Wales http://www.hpcoders.com.au Latest project: The Amoeba's Secret (http://www.hpcoders.com.au/AmoebasSecret.html) -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving
Re: Life in the Islamic State for women
Russell, This is because academics, worldwide, tend toward the left, and they tend to it like a religion, but its more an ideology. An ideology being a faith movement. In the US, the academics (nominally all leftists) lean strongly in favor of islamists, worldwide. This could, in part, be that the Saudis (America's best friend!) have thrown their money around to greedy pols. I could send you news reports of the welcoming embrace, and statements of the islamists, but if you're a convinced leftist, you won't budge a millimeter-to quote old, adolf. I have the sales capabilities of maggot and thus, will never be able to sell stocks and bonds or widgets. The people that do like your current Rightist guy, in Australia, are likely not in academia. In the US, this is called flyover country. Your clique are academics, thus everyone you know bends left, and the rest are seen as ignorant rubes. I mean, somebody elected elected Tom Abbot, correct? What is likely, to be a game changer, is a Jihadist strike upon the EU and the US, most likely, that will change the view of most people (not academics) overnight. -Original Message- From: Russell Standish li...@hpcoders.com.au To: everything-list everything-list@googlegroups.com Sent: Tue, Mar 31, 2015 12:14 am Subject: Re: Life in the Islamic State for women On Thu, Mar 26, 2015 at 07:04:10AM -0400, spudboy100 via Everything List wrote: Well, its not the new jihadists I blame, but the (yes) leftist academics, politicians, and news thugs, that have long, empowered, and made excuses for these aggressors. My suspicion is that they see the jihadists worldwide as being able to topple their shared capitalist enemies. Why else would somebody make excuses, constantly, for jihadists, islamists, and their antidemocratic mindset, anti women, and so forth? The left in all lands serve as the Islamist enablers, and some are billionaires who lean left. Yeah, I know this is divisive, but it's sadly, accurate. Maybe, you left voters could start to vote for nationalist politicians in your countries as a push-back against the jihadist-catering pols, academics, and newsies? You could still be for social justice and spend for it, but coddling the islamists by word and deed would need to be suppressed. They do like modern weaponry, delivered into their hands by allah, to use against the Qufars (all of us). This now includes NBC weapons. In which country are the lefties apologists for jihadists and islamists? Not in mine. Almost everybody I know is a leftie, coz nobody here likes our current rightie PM, but none of them support the IS. -- Prof Russell Standish Phone 0425 253119 (mobile) Principal, High Performance Coders Visiting Professor of Mathematics hpco...@hpcoders.com.au University of New South Wales http://www.hpcoders.com.au Latest project: The Amoeba's Secret (http://www.hpcoders.com.au/AmoebasSecret.html) -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Re: Life in the Islamic State for women
2015-03-31 12:11 GMT+02:00 Telmo Menezes te...@telmomenezes.com: On Tue, Mar 31, 2015 at 11:52 AM, Quentin Anciaux allco...@gmail.com wrote: 2015-03-31 10:37 GMT+02:00 Telmo Menezes te...@telmomenezes.com: On Tue, Mar 31, 2015 at 6:23 AM, Russell Standish li...@hpcoders.com.au wrote: On Thu, Mar 26, 2015 at 07:04:10AM -0400, spudboy100 via Everything List wrote: Well, its not the new jihadists I blame, but the (yes) leftist academics, politicians, and news thugs, that have long, empowered, and made excuses for these aggressors. My suspicion is that they see the jihadists worldwide as being able to topple their shared capitalist enemies. Why else would somebody make excuses, constantly, for jihadists, islamists, and their antidemocratic mindset, anti women, and so forth? The left in all lands serve as the Islamist enablers, and some are billionaires who lean left. Yeah, I know this is divisive, but it's sadly, accurate. Maybe, you left voters could start to vote for nationalist politicians in your countries as a push-back against the jihadist-catering pols, academics, and newsies? You could still be for social justice and spend for it, but coddling the islamists by word and deed would need to be suppressed. They do like modern weaponry, delivered into their hands by allah, to use against the Qufars (all of us). This now includes NBC weapons. In which country are the lefties apologists for jihadists and islamists? It is fairly common in Europe. Hi Quentin, First of all, I don't agree with any of the stuff spudboy wrote, except for this detail. The right-wing in Europe is rather terrible and I have no sympathy for their xenophobic inclinations. Which countries in Europe ? From my personal experience: Portugal, France and Germany. Not so sure about the UK. Because I know no lefties apologists for jihadists and islamists here in Belgium... also if I translate corretly lefties, in french it translates to gauchiste... and it's an insult... don't know if it is in english. I believe the French version has a more negative connotation, while the English one is a mostly neutral nickname. Someone might correct me if I'm wrong. If you equates sympathizer of the palestinian (who often have social/progressive politics preferences, I can admit) as apologists for jihadists and islamists, it's cleary an abuse and bad faith. I agree that this is related to the matter, but what I would say is that some left-leaning people extrapolate their sympathy for the Palestinians to an overall pro-Arab, anti-Israel stance. I don't see it that way... please also note that charlie hebdo is what you can call leftist... and it is clearly not pro jihad, or pro religion or whatever pro-religion/fascist related... most of the palestinian sympathizers (from known left or not) are clearly not hamas supporter... there are some clearly, but they're not common left wing or common in any left parties I know of, even radical left... I know of no radical left (if that's them you're pointing) in belgium and france who are *for* the djihadist and or islamisation of the society... could you provide of such persons/party who clearly states and defends such things ? as it is clearly against any socials or economical ideas of what is called the left. A certain tendency of the European left to dislike the USA also helps. So what do you mean by fairly common in Europe ? what left are talking about ? I'm not sure this is related to a type of left, I would say it's more related to the tribal personality type, who likes to be on the side of their group on all matters, no matter what. There are a lot of left-wing people who do not fit this category, of course. I know and am friends with some of them. It is true, for example, that the crimes of Hamas are completely ignored by the European mainstream press and many intellectuals. I don't think so... Quentin Telmo. Quentin Not in mine. Almost everybody I know is a leftie, coz nobody here likes our current rightie PM, but none of them support the IS. -- Prof Russell Standish Phone 0425 253119 (mobile) Principal, High Performance Coders Visiting Professor of Mathematics hpco...@hpcoders.com.au University of New South Wales http://www.hpcoders.com.au Latest project: The Amoeba's Secret (http://www.hpcoders.com.au/AmoebasSecret.html) -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
Re: Life in the Islamic State for women
Friends, you ALL are bugged down into 2nd rate argumentation. Russell had the only straight thought in his 2nd post so far (But his ideas come from Down Under...). We are in a fatal struggle facing every advancement (??) we made (and I speak in the name of the so called 'western civilisation') over the past - say - millennium to a brutal and ignorant force recognising only that 1500 y.o. script (lately barely understandable for recent readers) - and working to behead all 'infidels'. The so callable 'Islamist' dilemma centered on a Sunni - Shia divide, (not really!) after AlQuaeda attacked the USA, then pro-activated African countries in their behalf, the IS emerged as a forceful variant of it against the Iraqi and Syrian Shia regimes - now combining with AlQuaeda descendants (and many further variations) into ONE extremist front, which, however, appears differently in various countries. The USA (and several parts of Europe) (almost?) fight it, but also fights their AND it's own enemies: the Shiite Persians. Saudiland seems to use Yemen as a springboard to lead the efforts, yet only against Shias, but that may change soon. The US-cooperation is well 'oiled' for those, who direct the policies (including the highly profitable weapons industry and the destruction of many Americans forced into far countries for such profits). Is IS enough to win, or will they combine forces with the Saudis etc., maybe with the Shiites as well against the western world? And don't believe Down Under is exempt from the catastroph. On Tue, Mar 31, 2015 at 1:07 PM, 'Chris de Morsella' via Everything List everything-list@googlegroups.com wrote: *From:* everything-list@googlegroups.com [mailto: everything-list@googlegroups.com] *Sent:* Tuesday, March 31, 2015 7:16 AM *To:* everything-list@googlegroups.com *Subject:* Re: Life in the Islamic State for women Quentin, sometime its who you are silent about that is an indictment. For example, during the Vietnam conflict, there were mass demonstrations against the war. The leaders of the antiwar movement were never pacifists, but sided with the communists, and especially what the soviets wanted. They never protested against the Soviets hold in eastern europe or soviet funding wars in the middle east, North Korea, or, especially the communist Khmer Rogue in Kapuchea, where a million were massacred, Stalin Style, Mao style. Silent, like the lambs, to paraphrase Hannibal Lecter. These anti-war types, because of their being not pacifists, but communist, in their ideology, remained silent, Similarly, the anti-war peeps of today support the Islamists. For personal example (a minor one) when I perused the IEET site, where in one professor of anthropology, wrote an article on that website, stating that the Hamas war against Israel was a Transhumanist cause. I challenged the fellow on this and pondered what Transhumanists can have in common with Hamas who believes in and enforces Shariah Law (and all that implies). Let us say the examples I raised met with objections there, where John Hughes likes things hard left. I ended up contacting a former manager of that site who confirmed my view (his moderate liberal-libertarian). You have a strange distorted understanding of history as it becomes when squeezed through the toothpaste tube of your ideological optic. You are living proof of the dangers of subjectivism, of how the act of wearing ideological blinders distorts reality into the weird paranoid production your mind perceives. You take partial facts, half-truths, fantastic interpretation and cook up a grand conspiracy in the feverish recesses of your mental reification of reality – as it becomes perceived through your distorted optic. Reality only seems this way to you because this is what your mind’s eye demands it should be. I love my country enough to criticize it; do you? Chris Now you may ask why would leftists who call themselves now, progressives, side with the Islamists? An incomplete explanation is the progressives hope the Islamists knock the crap out of the West, thus, leaving themselves as the beneficiaries of such a civilizational failure. Maybe its a knee-jerk reaction? I don't care anymore, I just view who sides with whom. For instance, there has never been a proposed boycott out of academia against Saudi, Qatar, Iran, Iraq (under Saddam) North Korea, etc. I am not trying to convince you (an impossible task) simply trying to point out the logical incongruity of being good with Islamist totalitarianism. I am surprised that our civilization has not erupted in massive violence, and right now the streets are quiet? -Original Message- From: Quentin Anciaux allco...@gmail.com To: everything-list everything-list@googlegroups.com Sent: Tue, Mar 31, 2015 9:35 am Subject: Re: Life in the Islamic State for women 2015-03-31 12:11 GMT+02:00 Telmo Menezes te...@telmomenezes.com: On Tue, Mar 31, 2015
Re: Life in the Islamic State for women
As mentioned in another thread, the media have (as it were) blown the Islamic threat up out of all proportion. Climate change is a FAR greater threat to civilisation than ISIS will ever be. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Re: Life in the Islamic State for women
On Mon, Mar 30, 2015 at 3:35 AM, Kim Jones kimjo...@ozemail.com.au wrote: On 30 Mar 2015, at 11:19 am, LizR lizj...@gmail.com wrote: On 30 March 2015 at 08:39, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote: On 3/29/2015 3:55 AM, Telmo Menezes wrote: Please! Hunter Gatherers - warriors is a boys' club term for it. I can accept that the term warrior glorifies something nasty, but what term to use? Hunter Gatherer is not what I mean. But that's what you are. You go to the supermarket, don't you? Sure. I am also not a warrior. I'm not sure I understand your objection here. I refer to the people who directly confront other groups in battles to the death. Them? They're just idiot warmongers like the brutes they are confronting. Takes one to know one. Usually the real warmongers don't go to war. You are simplifying the issue too much. People have gone to fight wars for all sorts of reasons. My country was at war with its former colonies until the mid 70s and several men in my family and other people from that generation I know went to fight that war. Nobody asked them if they wanted to go. They are fairly regular people, and mostly anti-war because they know how it actually looks like to be in one. As soon as you have my tribe you also unfortunately have not in my tribe. This is one of the tragedies of game theory. The problem is that, even if you reject tribalism, you have no control over what other groups do, and they will probably attack you at some point to obtain your resources. I say probably because natural selection will favour such groups. I share your desire for a world without violent conflict, but I don't think it's an easy problem to solve. Removing resource scarcity seems like the best bet, because then there's nothing to fight for. Besides, some of them only may be warriors. Most are likely twelve pound weaklings who were hit over the head in the middle of the night and told they had this brilliant career ahead of them in the armed forces. Isn't that how you raise an army? I am under the impression that the most successful armies (from the Romans to modern USA) depend a lot on special units made of highly skilled people who went through a quite stringent selection and training process. There are, of course, always openings for cannon fodder, but you I don't think you win a war with cannon fodder. I also suspect that the vast majority of a military consists of people performing logistics, engineering, etc tasks rather than directly confronting the enemy. Men are naturally more suited for this sort of thing due to endocrine system differences, that leads to bigger bodies, more muscles and more aggression. This last being in fact the dominant characteristic which means it should come at the head of your list. Men are sacks of testosterone and adrenalin. Yes, but man and women are expressions of the same species, and historically women seem to show a preference for men who are sacks of testosterone -- because the ones who did were more likely to spread they genes. This is a species issue, not a gender issue. Add to that the limited reach of human perception and you can find yourself in a pitched battle at the drop of a hat, particularly where the tension is already high. Right, but this is just the outcome of an evolutionary process that just is. Considering Darwinism, I don't think you could expect anything else. I believe we can transcend the tyranny of biology, but what's the point in blaming people for how they are, when they had no say in being one way or the other? One of the job requirements for joining ISIS is that you are able to squirt testosterone out of one ear and adrenalin out the other. What real warriors these guys are!!! I think ISIS is pure evil, but I don't think they gained control of such a large territory in such an unstable region by being idiots... I think it's silly to say warrior glorifies something nasty. Yet there may be good reasons for sending up the concept as I am doing. I mean, warriors can be good boys or bad boys. I take it that there are three kinds of warriors: good, bad and imbecilic. These are tribes too and cut across the other tribal, clan lines. You might be a lowly footsoldier, though a good and trusted son of the Empire while your commanding officer is a rapist and a murdering despot that everyone would prefer to see deposed. I also take it that the badder the boy, the better the warrior. Kind of axiomatic. I don't know. I associate the bad boy with extreme individualism, and it appears to me that the army is the opposite of individualism. Bit none of these things are simple, of course. All the guys who beat me up in the playground in Primary school later on in life became cops! Go figure. Well, they did better than mine, who mostly became supermarket cashiers. There are a lot of cops who are cops for the wrong reasons, no doubt. The militarization of certain
Re: Life in the Islamic State for women
On Mon, Mar 30, 2015 at 2:04 AM, LizR lizj...@gmail.com wrote: On 28 March 2015 at 23:12, Telmo Menezes te...@telmomenezes.com wrote: The characteristics of a gender have been evolved by millions of years of selection, and women preferences play a role in this selection process. Not just A role but the main role, I would say. As any peahen or bowerbird can tell you, male animals (of most species) have to jump through hoops to attract females, because females have more to lose if they choose the wrong mate. This is one thing that makes me unpopular with feminists, when I mention that women have selectively bred men to be the way they are (the reverse is true, too, of course, but I would think to a lesser extent since women have more often got to choose). I agree with you. I avoided making such a strong argument because the percentage of women forced into unions, raped, kidnapped from other tribes, etc and the impact of these events in evolutionary history is highly debatable. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Re: Life in the Islamic State for women
On 30 March 2015 at 23:46, Telmo Menezes te...@telmomenezes.com wrote: On Mon, Mar 30, 2015 at 2:04 AM, LizR lizj...@gmail.com wrote: On 28 March 2015 at 23:12, Telmo Menezes te...@telmomenezes.com wrote: The characteristics of a gender have been evolved by millions of years of selection, and women preferences play a role in this selection process. Not just A role but the main role, I would say. As any peahen or bowerbird can tell you, male animals (of most species) have to jump through hoops to attract females, because females have more to lose if they choose the wrong mate. This is one thing that makes me unpopular with feminists, when I mention that women have selectively bred men to be the way they are (the reverse is true, too, of course, but I would think to a lesser extent since women have more often got to choose). I agree with you. I avoided making such a strong argument because the percentage of women forced into unions, raped, kidnapped from other tribes, etc and the impact of these events in evolutionary history is highly debatable. Good point. Clearly these have some impact, particularly, I would say, forced marriage which is still practiced in some cultures. Another factor is that there are various ways to induce abortions without modern medicine (mainly herbal, I think) so a rape victim, or someone who realises she's made a bad mistake has occasionally had control over whether to keep the child. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Re: Life in the Islamic State for women
On 30 March 2015 at 15:16, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote: On 3/29/2015 7:06 PM, LizR wrote: On 30 March 2015 at 14:35, Kim Jones kimjo...@ozemail.com.au wrote: Them? They're just idiot warmongers like the brutes they are confronting. Takes one to know one. As soon as you have my tribe you also unfortunately have not in my tribe. Besides, some of them only may be warriors. Most are likely twelve pound weaklings who were hit over the head in the middle of the night and told they had this brilliant career ahead of them in the armed forces. I imagine that most of the fighting done by men throughout human evolution has been against animals. Only a few of those animals were also human. This was a dirty job, no doubt, but someone had to do it - if early humans were to survive, and get some protein in their diets. I think there's an idea that eating meat helped us on the path to big-brained dominant species that we are today (apart from all the beetles and things). Hunting and eating meat no doubt provided an ecological niche that selected for a smart, cooperative, weapon making ground ape. I agree, although since we aren't exclusively carnivores there other selection factors at work. But I guess that's obvious (sexual selection for one, of course). -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Re: Life in the Islamic State for women
On Thu, Mar 26, 2015 at 07:04:10AM -0400, spudboy100 via Everything List wrote: Well, its not the new jihadists I blame, but the (yes) leftist academics, politicians, and news thugs, that have long, empowered, and made excuses for these aggressors. My suspicion is that they see the jihadists worldwide as being able to topple their shared capitalist enemies. Why else would somebody make excuses, constantly, for jihadists, islamists, and their antidemocratic mindset, anti women, and so forth? The left in all lands serve as the Islamist enablers, and some are billionaires who lean left. Yeah, I know this is divisive, but it's sadly, accurate. Maybe, you left voters could start to vote for nationalist politicians in your countries as a push-back against the jihadist-catering pols, academics, and newsies? You could still be for social justice and spend for it, but coddling the islamists by word and deed would need to be suppressed. They do like modern weaponry, delivered into their hands by allah, to use against the Qufars (all of us). This now includes NBC weapons. In which country are the lefties apologists for jihadists and islamists? Not in mine. Almost everybody I know is a leftie, coz nobody here likes our current rightie PM, but none of them support the IS. -- Prof Russell Standish Phone 0425 253119 (mobile) Principal, High Performance Coders Visiting Professor of Mathematics hpco...@hpcoders.com.au University of New South Wales http://www.hpcoders.com.au Latest project: The Amoeba's Secret (http://www.hpcoders.com.au/AmoebasSecret.html) -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Re: Life in the Islamic State for women
On 29 March 2015 at 23:55, Telmo Menezes te...@telmomenezes.com wrote: What is missing here is that there is some evidence for a common strategy on the women's side of being impregnated by the bad boy while marrying the nice guy, thus obtaining both the desirable genes and the resources. The biological games are rather brutal, and both sides employ nasty strategies. Well quite. I might have done this myself had I not had modern medical resources available to help me out of a certain situation. So easy to let this happen, but nowadays we have the technology to let women have second thoughts when previously it would have been too late. (I'm telling you and the NSA this in confidence, by the way) -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Re: Life in the Islamic State for women
On 30 Mar 2015, at 11:19 am, LizR lizj...@gmail.com wrote: On 30 March 2015 at 08:39, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote: On 3/29/2015 3:55 AM, Telmo Menezes wrote: Please! Hunter Gatherers - warriors is a boys' club term for it. I can accept that the term warrior glorifies something nasty, but what term to use? Hunter Gatherer is not what I mean. But that's what you are. You go to the supermarket, don't you? I refer to the people who directly confront other groups in battles to the death. Them? They're just idiot warmongers like the brutes they are confronting. Takes one to know one. As soon as you have my tribe you also unfortunately have not in my tribe. Besides, some of them only may be warriors. Most are likely twelve pound weaklings who were hit over the head in the middle of the night and told they had this brilliant career ahead of them in the armed forces. Isn't that how you raise an army? Men are naturally more suited for this sort of thing due to endocrine system differences, that leads to bigger bodies, more muscles and more aggression. This last being in fact the dominant characteristic which means it should come at the head of your list. Men are sacks of testosterone and adrenalin. Add to that the limited reach of human perception and you can find yourself in a pitched battle at the drop of a hat, particularly where the tension is already high. One of the job requirements for joining ISIS is that you are able to squirt testosterone out of one ear and adrenalin out the other. What real warriors these guys are!!! I think it's silly to say warrior glorifies something nasty. Yet there may be good reasons for sending up the concept as I am doing. I mean, warriors can be good boys or bad boys. I take it that there are three kinds of warriors: good, bad and imbecilic. These are tribes too and cut across the other tribal, clan lines. You might be a lowly footsoldier, though a good and trusted son of the Empire while your commanding officer is a rapist and a murdering despot that everyone would prefer to see deposed. I also take it that the badder the boy, the better the warrior. Kind of axiomatic. All the guys who beat me up in the playground in Primary school later on in life became cops! Go figure. Warriors do a dirty job - they're like cleaners. They do what you and I are simply not tooled-up well enough to do ourselves. Besides I can't squirt anything out of my ears. When some thug comes into my shop and points a gun at my head and I blow him away, that makes me a warrior, right? But he was a warrior too, see: it was on his teeshirt; he saw himself as fighting for some cause, so he is now a martyr. That's a politically correct judgement looking back at a different era through current glasses. I am looking at the present era. The concept of warrior has never evolved in meaning. Today's warriors are grunts doing a dirty job just as they always did. Having good warriors was sometimes the difference between survival and extinction. That's right. And when the war is over, the warriors get together to form a junta which kicks out the useless government that led to the conflict in the first place and they then install a military dictatorship. Once a warrior always a warrior. The way of the warrior in fact. You never give up on power. Kim Is what the men did in holding Bastogne nasty? They were attacked. I'm sure they did many nasty things in the course of defending it. Get over being nasty already. Warriors are nasty bastards. K Absolutely. If all men were cooperative then a single defector could rule the world, or at least make out like a bandit. Hence we have what I think is called a Nash equilibrium? -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Re: Life in the Islamic State for women
On 30 March 2015 at 08:39, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote: On 3/29/2015 3:55 AM, Telmo Menezes wrote: Please! Hunter Gatherers - warriors is a boys' club term for it. I can accept that the term warrior glorifies something nasty, but what term to use? Hunter Gatherer is not what I mean. I refer to the people who directly confront other groups in battles to the death. Men are naturally more suited for this sort of thing due to endocrine system differences, that leads to bigger bodies, more muscles and more aggression. I think it's silly to say warrior glorifies something nasty. That's a politically correct judgement looking back at a different era through current glasses. Having good warriors was sometimes the difference between survival and extinction. Is what the men did in holding Bastogne nasty? Absolutely. If all men were cooperative then a single defector could rule the world, or at least make out like a bandit. Hence we have what I think is called a Nash equilibrium? -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Re: Life in the Islamic State for women
On 30 March 2015 at 14:35, Kim Jones kimjo...@ozemail.com.au wrote: Them? They're just idiot warmongers like the brutes they are confronting. Takes one to know one. As soon as you have my tribe you also unfortunately have not in my tribe. Besides, some of them only may be warriors. Most are likely twelve pound weaklings who were hit over the head in the middle of the night and told they had this brilliant career ahead of them in the armed forces. I imagine that most of the fighting done by men throughout human evolution has been against animals. Only a few of those animals were also human. This was a dirty job, no doubt, but someone had to do it - if early humans were to survive, and get some protein in their diets. I think there's an idea that eating meat helped us on the path to big-brained dominant species that we are today (apart from all the beetles and things). -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Re: Life in the Islamic State for women
On 29 March 2015 at 17:15, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote: Women have evolved to be attracted to guys that can get lots of women pregnant - that's sexual selection in action. Peahens mate with peacocks that have beautiful tails because that means their sons will have beautiful tails and attract peahens. Love is a strange loop. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Re: Life in the Islamic State for women
On 29 March 2015 at 10:21, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote: On 3/28/2015 3:12 AM, Telmo Menezes wrote: Many people (notably feminists) complain about the alpha-male sociopathic douchebag ruining society for everyone. But then, if you investigate further, this archetype has a lot of success with women. Of course the attractiveness of the bad-boy rocker anti-hero to women is a commonplace. It's easily explained as a facet of Darwinian sexual selection. Of course. The point is that hitching your genes to a Bill Sikes type will give them a greater chance of being spread further (assuming you survive long enough to produce some offspring, of course - Nancy han't quite thought it through, apparently.) -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Re: Life in the Islamic State for women
On 3/29/2015 7:06 PM, LizR wrote: On 30 March 2015 at 14:35, Kim Jones kimjo...@ozemail.com.au mailto:kimjo...@ozemail.com.au wrote: Them? They're just idiot warmongers like the brutes they are confronting. Takes one to know one. As soon as you have my tribe you also unfortunately have not in my tribe. Besides, some of them only may be warriors. Most are likely twelve pound weaklings who were hit over the head in the middle of the night and told they had this brilliant career ahead of them in the armed forces. I imagine that most of the fighting done by men throughout human evolution has been against animals. Only a few of those animals were also human. This was a dirty job, no doubt, but someone had to do it - if early humans were to survive, and get some protein in their diets. I think there's an idea that eating meat helped us on the path to big-brained dominant species that we are today (apart from all the beetles and things). Hunting and eating meat no doubt provided an ecological niche that selected for a smart, cooperative, weapon making ground ape. Brent -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Re: Life in the Islamic State for women
On 3/29/2015 6:35 PM, Kim Jones wrote: On 30 Mar 2015, at 11:19 am, LizR lizj...@gmail.com mailto:lizj...@gmail.com wrote: On 30 March 2015 at 08:39, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net mailto:meeke...@verizon.net wrote: On 3/29/2015 3:55 AM, Telmo Menezes wrote: Please! Hunter Gatherers - warriors is a boys' club term for it. I can accept that the term warrior glorifies something nasty, but what term to use? Hunter Gatherer is not what I mean. But that's what you are. You go to the supermarket, don't you? I refer to the people who directly confront other groups in battles to the death. Them? They're just idiot warmongers like the brutes they are confronting. Takes one to know one. As soon as you have my tribe you also unfortunately have not in my tribe. Besides, some of them only may be warriors. Most are likely twelve pound weaklings who were hit over the head in the middle of the night and told they had this brilliant career ahead of them in the armed forces. Isn't that how you raise an army? Or you promise that they'll be in on creation of a wonderful new world order and it will be a glorious adventure. Men are naturally more suited for this sort of thing due to endocrine system differences, that leads to bigger bodies, more muscles and more aggression. This last being in fact the dominant characteristic which means it should come at the head of your list. Men are sacks of testosterone and adrenalin. Add to that the limited reach of human perception and you can find yourself in a pitched battle at the drop of a hat, particularly where the tension is already high. You must still be in grade school. That's the last time I remember having a fist fight. One of the job requirements for joining ISIS is that you are able to squirt testosterone out of one ear and adrenalin out the other. What real warriors these guys are!!! I wonder how all those girls from the UK manage to join? The core of ISIS is all the Sunni officers that were throw out of the Iraqi army by Bremer - another of the stupid moves by the Bush administration. I think it's silly to say warrior glorifies something nasty. Yet there may be good reasons for sending up the concept as I am doing. I mean, warriors can be good boys or bad boys. I take it that there are three kinds of warriors: good, bad and imbecilic. These are tribes too and cut across the other tribal, clan lines. You might be a lowly footsoldier, though a good and trusted son of the Empire while your commanding officer is a rapist and a murdering despot that everyone would prefer to see deposed. I also take it that the badder the boy, the better the warrior. Kind of axiomatic. All the guys who beat me up in the playground in Primary school later on in life became cops! Go figure. Warriors do a dirty job - they're like cleaners. They do what you and I are simply not tooled-up well enough to do ourselves. Besides I can't squirt anything out of my ears. When some thug comes into my shop and points a gun at my head and I blow him away, that makes me a warrior, right? But he was a warrior too, see: it was on his teeshirt; he saw himself as fighting for some cause, so he is now a martyr. That's a politically correct judgement looking back at a different era through current glasses. I am looking at the present era. The concept of warrior has never evolved in meaning. Today's warriors are grunts doing a dirty job just as they always did. Fighting a war is always a dirty job. Having good warriors was sometimes the difference between survival and extinction. That's right. And when the war is over, the warriors get together to form a junta which kicks out the useless government that led to the conflict in the first place and they then install a military dictatorship. WW2 was won by the UK, US, USSR, Canada - which one installed a junta? I believe junta is a South American word. How many South American nations have won a war? Once a warrior always a warrior. The way of the warrior in fact. You never give up on power. Kim Is what the men did in holding Bastogne nasty? They were attacked. I'm sure they did many nasty things in the course of defending it. Get over being nasty already. Warriors are nasty bastards. They killed people - that's what you do in war. Warriors are just people who fight in wars. How easily you dehumanize people - and you're not even in a war, just a mailing list. Brent There is no such source and cause of strife, quarrel, fights, malignant opposition, persecution, and war, and all evil in the state as religion. Let it once enter our civil affairs, our government would soon be destroyed. Let it once enter our common schools, they would be destroyed . . . Those who made our Constitution saw this, and used the most apt and comprehensive language in it to prevent such a catastrophe.² --
Re: Life in the Islamic State for women
On Sun, Mar 29, 2015 at 1:33 AM, Kim Jones kimjo...@ozemail.com.au wrote: On 28 Mar 2015, at 9:12 pm, Telmo Menezes te...@telmomenezes.com wrote: Hi Kim, On Thu, Mar 26, 2015 at 7:47 AM, Kim Jones kimjo...@ozemail.com.au wrote: On 26 Mar 2015, at 2:21 pm, LizR lizj...@gmail.com wrote: http://www.raqqa-sl.com/en/?p=857 So most of these women are Brits? WTF! Makes your blood run cold. People are turning into zombies left right and centre. There is absolutely nothing whatsoever in organised religion for women. This whole conflict is a boys' club tribal thing. Women are necessary to the tribe because a good metric of any tribe's success is the number of willing female participants. Just ask Ghengis Kahn. Just ask the Christians; they have women dress in form-obscuring vetements as well; they are called nuns and presumably they lie around all day having erotic fantasies about being loved conveniently by Jesus without all the messy boy stuff that goes with sex. I think this model of men as exploiters and women as victims is too simplistic. If only it were that simple. The model I use is the tribalism model. The tribalism model involves exploiters and victims, yes, but this is not necessarily a gender distinction thing. I think tribal cultures come in a huge diversity. I would say that some of these cultures are anti-exploitative. One of the mechanisms that some anthropologist friends told me about is a common belief in Amazonian tribes that women can be impregnated by several men, and that the child acquires the best characteristics of each father. While male-oriented, this leads to a peaceful environment because there is no motivation for alpha-maleness, and there is a lot of loyalty to the group. Some researchers claim that members of these tribes express romantic feelings towards the tribe itself. Some tribes, e.g in Tibete are matriarchal. The environmental switch to matriarchy appears to be a small territory for farming, where polyandry prevents further fragmentation of farms. Some people obtain real power in the world for a reason that some others too can have a purchase on, so a cooperative group forms which then exists to make others do what the group wants and it is quite as simple as that, initially. Group psychology aids survival so it has immense selection value in terms of evolution. I imagine social amoebas get together for much the same reasons. The plurality of selves somehow projects or reverts to a group self or, in today's terms: a corporation. Agreed. A person is a corporation; an immense number of cooperating entities that all answer to the name Freddy. Agreed. I've been trying to understand the horror of ISIS, and more specifically what could lead women living in the west to join the movement. One of the dynamics that seems to emerge from analyzing recruitment strategies and interviewing people that defect the movement is this: hard as it may be to believe, the jihadist fighter archetype seems to be a powerful sex symbol for certain women. Many women are victims in this situation, but so are many man. And other women collaborate in the vicitimization and are responsible for encouraging men to become jihadist fighters. Of course. I merely claim that the majority of the all-powerful tribes on Earth are boys' clubs, but women have sometimes refused to be accessories to this as in the case of feminism. I feel this is a bit too judgemental towards tribes, which are just blindly following an evolved survival strategy. Feminism is a product of civilization. It became possible post-tribalism, and it's a sophisticated correction of old norms that no longer serve the group but are simply a source of unfairness. It is also a very heterogeneous label, ranging from benevolent suffragettes who demanded equal rights, to hate groups who call for the extermination of all men. Briefly, from the gender angle: The female perspective: as hunter-gatherers (we have never stopped being this) it makes sense to mate with the blokes who command the most resources! This is the motivating factor. Bad boy behaviour is sexy because it promises powerfully well for a woman's protection. A good boy will don a suit and get on life's treadmill to work steadily toward some shared dream perhaps but an unshaven bad boy will realise that dream a lot sooner, the good boy having died of a stress-related coronary well before realising his dream. What is missing here is that there is some evidence for a common strategy on the women's side of being impregnated by the bad boy while marrying the nice guy, thus obtaining both the desirable genes and the resources. The biological games are rather brutal, and both sides employ nasty strategies. From the male perspective: the more women we co-opt into our tribe, the more sex we get and the bigger and more powerful the tribe will become. We need baby factories. The baby factories don't have to
Re: Life in the Islamic State for women
On Sun, Mar 29, 2015 at 9:39 PM, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote: On 3/29/2015 3:55 AM, Telmo Menezes wrote: Please! Hunter Gatherers - warriors is a boys' club term for it. I can accept that the term warrior glorifies something nasty, but what term to use? Hunter Gatherer is not what I mean. I refer to the people who directly confront other groups in battles to the death. Men are naturally more suited for this sort of thing due to endocrine system differences, that leads to bigger bodies, more muscles and more aggression. I think it's silly to say warrior glorifies something nasty. That's a politically correct judgement looking back at a different era through current glasses. Having good warriors was sometimes the difference between survival and extinction. Is what the men did in holding Bastogne nasty? I agree. I felt into the PC trap myself by trying to remove distractions from the other point I was trying to make. Telmo. Brent -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
RE: Life in the Islamic State for women
From: everything-list@googlegroups.com [mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Telmo Menezes On Sun, Mar 29, 2015 at 9:39 PM, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote: On 3/29/2015 3:55 AM, Telmo Menezes wrote: Please! Hunter Gatherers - warriors is a boys' club term for it. I can accept that the term warrior glorifies something nasty, but what term to use? Hunter Gatherer is not what I mean. I refer to the people who directly confront other groups in battles to the death. Men are naturally more suited for this sort of thing due to endocrine system differences, that leads to bigger bodies, more muscles and more aggression. I think it's silly to say warrior glorifies something nasty. That's a politically correct judgement looking back at a different era through current glasses. Having good warriors was sometimes the difference between survival and extinction. Is what the men did in holding Bastogne nasty? I agree. I felt into the PC trap myself by trying to remove distractions from the other point I was trying to make. “Warrior” is an archetype existing in each of us, man or woman! It is a value neutral, potential, that is innate in our species (as well as most other animal species) The warrior is our inner guardian (facet/archetype of our nature) – there and accessible from somewhere within each of us (if we can discover this and through meditated practice learn how to access this) to focus our being in such moments and take such clear headed calm centered actions as needed in order to ensure the continuity of our existential thread in four dimensional spacetime. Being able to access the “warrior” within confers a definite survival advantage for the individual who nurtures the emergence of a solid and well known connection within themselves to this facet of their being. Political power structures naturally seek to harness this individual inner phenomenon for the furtherance of whatever individual, family, or class agenda is dear to their hearts… and whole generations are sent off to slaughter (as in WWI) – so as with most things the value attached to “warrior” comes from and is caused by the intent and context from which it emerges. Chris Telmo. Brent -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Re: Life in the Islamic State for women
On 3/29/2015 3:55 AM, Telmo Menezes wrote: Please! Hunter Gatherers - warriors is a boys' club term for it. I can accept that the term warrior glorifies something nasty, but what term to use? Hunter Gatherer is not what I mean. I refer to the people who directly confront other groups in battles to the death. Men are naturally more suited for this sort of thing due to endocrine system differences, that leads to bigger bodies, more muscles and more aggression. I think it's silly to say warrior glorifies something nasty. That's a politically correct judgement looking back at a different era through current glasses. Having good warriors was sometimes the difference between survival and extinction. Is what the men did in holding Bastogne nasty? Brent -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Re: Life in the Islamic State for women
In one of Samiya's posts there was a remark on women - in the afterlife, not here - eliminating the gender differences after death. Here their tasks are family concerned while over there (???) they participate in the bliss of Heaven just as do Earthly males. I did not plunge deeply into the question, but this could be one reason why women (still 2nd rate persons in western society) seek Muslim bliss. Plus - maybe - the freedom to kill for the more terrositically minded. Besides: Martyrdom always had attractive power. JM On Sun, Mar 29, 2015 at 4:41 PM, 'Chris de Morsella' via Everything List everything-list@googlegroups.com wrote: *From:* everything-list@googlegroups.com [mailto: everything-list@googlegroups.com] *On Behalf Of *Telmo Menezes On Sun, Mar 29, 2015 at 9:39 PM, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote: On 3/29/2015 3:55 AM, Telmo Menezes wrote: Please! Hunter Gatherers - warriors is a boys' club term for it. I can accept that the term warrior glorifies something nasty, but what term to use? Hunter Gatherer is not what I mean. I refer to the people who directly confront other groups in battles to the death. Men are naturally more suited for this sort of thing due to endocrine system differences, that leads to bigger bodies, more muscles and more aggression. I think it's silly to say warrior glorifies something nasty. That's a politically correct judgement looking back at a different era through current glasses. Having good warriors was sometimes the difference between survival and extinction. Is what the men did in holding Bastogne nasty? I agree. I felt into the PC trap myself by trying to remove distractions from the other point I was trying to make. “Warrior” is an archetype existing in each of us, man or woman! It is a value neutral, potential, that is innate in our species (as well as most other animal species) The warrior is our inner guardian (facet/archetype of our nature) – there and accessible from somewhere within each of us (if we can discover this and through meditated practice learn how to access this) to focus our being in such moments and take such clear headed calm centered actions as needed in order to ensure the continuity of our existential thread in four dimensional spacetime. Being able to access the “warrior” within confers a definite survival advantage for the individual who nurtures the emergence of a solid and well known connection within themselves to this facet of their being. Political power structures naturally seek to harness this individual inner phenomenon for the furtherance of whatever individual, family, or class agenda is dear to their hearts… and whole generations are sent off to slaughter (as in WWI) – so as with most things the value attached to “warrior” comes from and is caused by the intent and context from which it emerges. Chris Telmo. Brent -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Re: Life in the Islamic State for women
On 28 March 2015 at 23:12, Telmo Menezes te...@telmomenezes.com wrote: The characteristics of a gender have been evolved by millions of years of selection, and women preferences play a role in this selection process. Not just A role but the main role, I would say. As any peahen or bowerbird can tell you, male animals (of most species) have to jump through hoops to attract females, because females have more to lose if they choose the wrong mate. This is one thing that makes me unpopular with feminists, when I mention that women have selectively bred men to be the way they are (the reverse is true, too, of course, but I would think to a lesser extent since women have more often got to choose). -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Re: Life in the Islamic State for women
On 28 Mar 2015, at 9:12 pm, Telmo Menezes te...@telmomenezes.com wrote: Hi Kim, On Thu, Mar 26, 2015 at 7:47 AM, Kim Jones kimjo...@ozemail.com.au wrote: On 26 Mar 2015, at 2:21 pm, LizR lizj...@gmail.com wrote: http://www.raqqa-sl.com/en/?p=857 So most of these women are Brits? WTF! Makes your blood run cold. People are turning into zombies left right and centre. There is absolutely nothing whatsoever in organised religion for women. This whole conflict is a boys' club tribal thing. Women are necessary to the tribe because a good metric of any tribe's success is the number of willing female participants. Just ask Ghengis Kahn. Just ask the Christians; they have women dress in form-obscuring vetements as well; they are called nuns and presumably they lie around all day having erotic fantasies about being loved conveniently by Jesus without all the messy boy stuff that goes with sex. I think this model of men as exploiters and women as victims is too simplistic. If only it were that simple. The model I use is the tribalism model. The tribalism model involves exploiters and victims, yes, but this is not necessarily a gender distinction thing. Some people obtain real power in the world for a reason that some others too can have a purchase on, so a cooperative group forms which then exists to make others do what the group wants and it is quite as simple as that, initially. Group psychology aids survival so it has immense selection value in terms of evolution. I imagine social amoebas get together for much the same reasons. The plurality of selves somehow projects or reverts to a group self or, in today's terms: a corporation. A person is a corporation; an immense number of cooperating entities that all answer to the name Freddy. I've been trying to understand the horror of ISIS, and more specifically what could lead women living in the west to join the movement. One of the dynamics that seems to emerge from analyzing recruitment strategies and interviewing people that defect the movement is this: hard as it may be to believe, the jihadist fighter archetype seems to be a powerful sex symbol for certain women. Many women are victims in this situation, but so are many man. And other women collaborate in the vicitimization and are responsible for encouraging men to become jihadist fighters. Of course. I merely claim that the majority of the all-powerful tribes on Earth are boys' clubs, but women have sometimes refused to be accessories to this as in the case of feminism. Briefly, from the gender angle: The female perspective: as hunter-gatherers (we have never stopped being this) it makes sense to mate with the blokes who command the most resources! This is the motivating factor. Bad boy behaviour is sexy because it promises powerfully well for a woman's protection. A good boy will don a suit and get on life's treadmill to work steadily toward some shared dream perhaps but an unshaven bad boy will realise that dream a lot sooner, the good boy having died of a stress-related coronary well before realising his dream. From the male perspective: the more women we co-opt into our tribe, the more sex we get and the bigger and more powerful the tribe will become. We need baby factories. The baby factories don't have to believe in our dogma but it helps. They don't have any choice, really because if we need them we will simply abduct them. The psyche of both women and men is not as simple as mainstream culture likes to paint it. Why do you think 50 shades of grey was so popular? Haven't seen it so cannot comment. Tell me. Why was it so popular? I thought if people wanted to watch porn these days they can simply look at oceans of it for nothing online at home. Why pay eighteen bucks to watch it in a dark cinema with the raincoat brigade? I guess it has a lot to do with peoples' prurient fascination with the possibility that pain might be erotically interesting and what that says about us as a species? Am I getting warm? When the Romans first met Germanic tribes, they were surprised to see women in the back with spears, ready to kill any man who tried to defect from the front lines. For this reason the Teutons only placed the ugly fat ones at the back, the slender gorgeous ones being reserved for the orgy after the battle, should they win ( which they often did). The Romans, being the more successful tribe, no longer needed the ugly fat women at the back prodding them in the bum with spears. Men and women are physiologically different, which makes them more naturally fit for different tasks, and men make better warriors. Please! Hunter Gatherers - warriors is a boys' club term for it. But biology has a more unified plan, and everyone conforms to the plans of biology through instinct. You betcha I think that blaming one of the genders is missing the point. This might be clearer if
Re: Life in the Islamic State for women
On 3/28/2015 3:12 AM, Telmo Menezes wrote: Many people (notably feminists) complain about the alpha-male sociopathic douchebag ruining society for everyone. But then, if you investigate further, this archetype has a lot of success with women. Of course the attractiveness of the bad-boy rocker anti-hero to women is a commonplace. It's easily explained as a facet of Darwinian sexual selection. Brent -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Re: Life in the Islamic State for women
On 3/28/2015 5:33 PM, Kim Jones wrote: The female perspective: as hunter-gatherers (we have never stopped being this) it makes sense to mate with the blokes who command the most resources! This is the motivating factor. Bad boy behaviour is sexy because it promises powerfully well for a woman's protection. A good boy will don a suit and get on life's treadmill to work steadily toward some shared dream perhaps but an unshaven bad boy will realise that dream a lot sooner, the good boy having died of a stress-related coronary well before realising his dream. Nonsense. The bad boy may make a lot of money or he may drink himself to death, but either way he's not going to protect his female conquests or his offspring. That's why he's a bad boy. But because he has lots of women, he's attractive to women. Women have evolved to be attracted to guys that can get lots of women pregnant - that's sexual selection in action. Peahens mate with peacocks that have beautiful tails because that means their sons will have beautiful tails and attract peahens. The good boy will make money and take care of his wife and children - so that tends to balance the attraction of the bad boy and why both types are successful in the evolution game. Brent -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Re: Life in the Islamic State for women
Hi Kim, On Thu, Mar 26, 2015 at 7:47 AM, Kim Jones kimjo...@ozemail.com.au wrote: On 26 Mar 2015, at 2:21 pm, LizR lizj...@gmail.com wrote: http://www.raqqa-sl.com/en/?p=857 So most of these women are Brits? WTF! Makes your blood run cold. People are turning into zombies left right and centre. There is absolutely nothing whatsoever in organised religion for women. This whole conflict is a boys' club tribal thing. Women are necessary to the tribe because a good metric of any tribe's success is the number of willing female participants. Just ask Ghengis Kahn. Just ask the Christians; they have women dress in form-obscuring vetements as well; they are called nuns and presumably they lie around all day having erotic fantasies about being loved conveniently by Jesus without all the messy boy stuff that goes with sex. I think this model of men as exploiters and women as victims is too simplistic. If only it were that simple. I've been trying to understand the horror of ISIS, and more specifically what could lead women living in the west to join the movement. One of the dynamics that seems to emerge from analyzing recruitment strategies and interviewing people that defect the movement is this: hard as it may be to believe, the jihadist fighter archetype seems to be a powerful sex symbol for certain women. Many women are victims in this situation, but so are many man. And other women collaborate in the vicitimization and are responsible for encouraging men to become jihadist fighters. The psyche of both women and men is not as simple as mainstream culture likes to paint it. Why do you think 50 shades of grey was so popular? When the Romans first met Germanic tribes, they were surprised to see women in the back with spears, ready to kill any man who tried to defect from the front lines. Men and women are physiologically different, which makes them more naturally fit for different tasks, and men make better warriors. But biology has a more unified plan, and everyone conforms to the plans of biology through instinct. I think that blaming one of the genders is missing the point. The characteristics of a gender have been evolved by millions of years of selection, and women preferences play a role in this selection process. Many people (notably feminists) complain about the alpha-male sociopathic douchebag ruining society for everyone. But then, if you investigate further, this archetype has a lot of success with women. It is our biology itself that we have to transcend -- the parts of the program that no longer serve us, and evolution is too slow. It's not going to be an easy path. We are still sophisticated monkeys, both men and women. I put more faith in the transformative power of technology than in political change. But I do think by now that that slew of apocalyptic zombie movies that the world passed through recently was some kind of cultural dream or clairvoyant nightmare about this ISIS-led zombie apocalypse we now appear to be heading for. You like that? Beheading for.. This is an interesting point. The first wave of zombie movies was more a criticism of consumerism: showing the horror of going to the mall and seeing your fellow humans in a weird trance of buying irrelevant stuff and not caring about anything else. I think the second wave became very popular with a recent break in trust in the political systems of the west. It's not that average citizens don't trust the government, it's that they can't even make sense of what's going on, or if someone is really in charge. This leads to a fear that things could be out of control, and that social contracts could collapse at any moment. This is also what leads to the popularity of cartoonish ideas like the Illuminati -- an attempt to make sense of the hyper-complex almost-out-of-control, 7 billion people society with a simple narrative. Telmo. We had one young bloke here in Oz, disappeared recently to Syria to fight with IS. Anglo. Good kid with high intelligence apparently. Got hooked by the jihad thing. His mates said he had a chip on his shoulder and had turned weird. What ISIS offering apparently more convincing than life in the burbs of Sydney as a molly-coddled youngster in middle class, white supremacist Australia. ISIS said Here comes one! Stick a bomb belt on him and send him off to oblivion. Which they did; he detonated it and managed to blow up an empty car and himself. Can you be a failure as a Jihadi? This kid was. Kim -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. -- You received this message because you are
Re: Life in the Islamic State for women
LizR: I am not so sure Big Business *has* the interest of their shareholders at all. It is the OWNER, the slave-driver, with enforcement, some of which allowed to participate in some profits as 'shareholders', CEOs, board-members etc. It is an advanced feudalism, coming from a more advanced form of slavery. That is what we applaud in ANY party by voting as sheep going under the scissors. TPPA JM On Thu, Mar 26, 2015 at 5:52 PM, LizR lizj...@gmail.com wrote: The problem is that this puts all the power in the hands of big business, who don't have the interests of anyone but their shareholders at heart. Also it leads to more repressive laws. This is in fact the destruction of western democracy that is the aim of the jihadists and so on (which is in turn a reaction to western foreign policy over a long period). Sadly which particular set of suits you vote in isn't going to help when the real power is in the hands of big business (especially when you have a monolithic 2-party system where both sides have been bought out). Try voting against the TPPA and see how you get on. On 27 March 2015 at 01:55, Alberto G. Corona agocor...@gmail.com wrote: spudboy. Well said. Indeed, there are a massive change in vote from the extreme left to nationalism in countries like France, out of Fear of Islam based on direct personal experiences. (In France the islam is something that you watch everyday even if you have the TV switched off). The problem is that the natural path of these deculturalized and hedonistic leftists that had a sudden encounter with reality is a form of fascism that is an equally denaturalized and simplistic vision of reality, based on a ideological reverie, instead of a return to common sense, tradition and prudence. The fascism of the 30s was created by extreme leftists. Indeed all these antireligious idiots (sorry, this is descriptive, no demoting intended) that consider all religions equally dangerous are right in the delusional process that lean to the rediscovery of Fascism. 2015-03-26 12:04 GMT+01:00 spudboy100 via Everything List everything-list@googlegroups.com: Well, its not the new jihadists I blame, but the (yes) leftist academics, politicians, and news thugs, that have long, empowered, and made excuses for these aggressors. My suspicion is that they see the jihadists worldwide as being able to topple their shared capitalist enemies. Why else would somebody make excuses, constantly, for jihadists, islamists, and their antidemocratic mindset, anti women, and so forth? The left in all lands serve as the Islamist enablers, and some are billionaires who lean left. Yeah, I know this is divisive, but it's sadly, accurate. Maybe, you left voters could start to vote for nationalist politicians in your countries as a push-back against the jihadist-catering pols, academics, and newsies? You could still be for social justice and spend for it, but coddling the islamists by word and deed would need to be suppressed. They do like modern weaponry, delivered into their hands by allah, to use against the Qufars (all of us). This now includes NBC weapons. -Original Message- From: Alberto G. Corona agocor...@gmail.com To: everything-list everything-list@googlegroups.com Sent: Thu, Mar 26, 2015 3:49 am Subject: Re: Life in the Islamic State for women I don´t know what to choose either the civilization of the horde of cavemen or the set of pseudo enlightened idiots that renegate of everything except themselves, that defecate over their ancestors and judge the world from the stratosphere in which they live, with little or no knowledge, maybe some mathematics, Each one a civilization on itself. 2015-03-26 7:47 GMT+01:00 Kim Jones kimjo...@ozemail.com.au: On 26 Mar 2015, at 2:21 pm, LizR lizj...@gmail.com wrote: http://www.raqqa-sl.com/en/?p=857 So most of these women are Brits? WTF! Makes your blood run cold. People are turning into zombies left right and centre. There is absolutely nothing whatsoever in organised religion for women. This whole conflict is a boys' club tribal thing. Women are necessary to the tribe because a good metric of any tribe's success is the number of willing female participants. Just ask Ghengis Kahn. Just ask the Christians; they have women dress in form-obscuring vetements as well; they are called nuns and presumably they lie around all day having erotic fantasies about being loved conveniently by Jesus without all the messy boy stuff that goes with sex. But I do think by now that that slew of apocalyptic zombie movies that the world passed through recently was some kind of cultural dream or clairvoyant nightmare about this ISIS-led zombie apocalypse we now appear to be heading for. You like that? Beheading for.. We had one young bloke here in Oz, disappeared recently to Syria to fight with IS. Anglo. Good kid with high intelligence apparently. Got hooked by the jihad thing
Re: Life in the Islamic State for women
On 28 March 2015 at 10:19, John Mikes jami...@gmail.com wrote: LizR: I am not so sure Big Business *has* the interest of their shareholders at all. It is the OWNER, the slave-driver, with enforcement, some of which allowed to participate in some profits as 'shareholders', CEOs, board-members etc. It is an advanced feudalism, coming from a more advanced form of slavery. That is what we applaud in ANY party by voting as sheep going under the scissors. OK, well, it's a detail - as you say either way it's feudalism and slavery. TPPA Sorry that's a hot topic in NZ right now (except the govt wants everyone to pay it no heed so they can push it through unopposed). Plus they keep changing the name in the hope that no one will realise what's going on. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trans-Pacific_Partnership -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Re: Life in the Islamic State for women
Well, its not the new jihadists I blame, but the (yes) leftist academics, politicians, and news thugs, that have long, empowered, and made excuses for these aggressors. My suspicion is that they see the jihadists worldwide as being able to topple their shared capitalist enemies. Why else would somebody make excuses, constantly, for jihadists, islamists, and their antidemocratic mindset, anti women, and so forth? The left in all lands serve as the Islamist enablers, and some are billionaires who lean left. Yeah, I know this is divisive, but it's sadly, accurate. Maybe, you left voters could start to vote for nationalist politicians in your countries as a push-back against the jihadist-catering pols, academics, and newsies? You could still be for social justice and spend for it, but coddling the islamists by word and deed would need to be suppressed. They do like modern weaponry, delivered into their hands by allah, to use against the Qufars (all of us). This now includes NBC weapons. -Original Message- From: Alberto G. Corona agocor...@gmail.com To: everything-list everything-list@googlegroups.com Sent: Thu, Mar 26, 2015 3:49 am Subject: Re: Life in the Islamic State for women I don´t know what to choose either the civilization of the horde of cavemen or the set of pseudo enlightened idiots that renegate of everything except themselves, that defecate over their ancestors and judge the world from the stratosphere in which they live, with little or no knowledge, maybe some mathematics, Each one a civilization on itself. 2015-03-26 7:47 GMT+01:00 Kim Joneskimjo...@ozemail.com.au: On 26 Mar 2015, at 2:21 pm, LizR lizj...@gmail.com wrote: http://www.raqqa-sl.com/en/?p=857 So most of these women are Brits? WTF! Makes your blood run cold. People are turning into zombies left right and centre. There is absolutely nothing whatsoever in organised religion for women. This whole conflict is a boys' club tribal thing. Women are necessary to the tribe because a good metric of any tribe's success is the number of willing female participants. Just ask Ghengis Kahn. Just ask the Christians; they have women dress in form-obscuring vetements as well; they are called nuns and presumably they lie around all day having erotic fantasies about being loved conveniently by Jesus without all the messy boy stuff that goes with sex. But I do think by now that that slew of apocalyptic zombie movies that the world passed through recently was some kind of cultural dream or clairvoyant nightmare about this ISIS-led zombie apocalypse we now appear to be heading for. You like that? Beheading for.. We had one young bloke here in Oz, disappeared recently to Syria to fight with IS. Anglo. Good kid with high intelligence apparently. Got hooked by the jihad thing. His mates said he had a chip on his shoulder and had turned weird. What ISIS offering apparently more convincing than life in the burbs of Sydney as a molly-coddled youngster in middle class, white supremacist Australia. ISIS said Here comes one! Stick a bomb belt on him and send him off to oblivion. Which they did; he detonated it and managed to blow up an empty car and himself. Can you be a failure as a Jihadi? This kid was. Kim -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. -- Alberto. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Re: Life in the Islamic State for women
spudboy. Well said. Indeed, there are a massive change in vote from the extreme left to nationalism in countries like France, out of Fear of Islam based on direct personal experiences. (In France the islam is something that you watch everyday even if you have the TV switched off). The problem is that the natural path of these deculturalized and hedonistic leftists that had a sudden encounter with reality is a form of fascism that is an equally denaturalized and simplistic vision of reality, based on a ideological reverie, instead of a return to common sense, tradition and prudence. The fascism of the 30s was created by extreme leftists. Indeed all these antireligious idiots (sorry, this is descriptive, no demoting intended) that consider all religions equally dangerous are right in the delusional process that lean to the rediscovery of Fascism. 2015-03-26 12:04 GMT+01:00 spudboy100 via Everything List everything-list@googlegroups.com: Well, its not the new jihadists I blame, but the (yes) leftist academics, politicians, and news thugs, that have long, empowered, and made excuses for these aggressors. My suspicion is that they see the jihadists worldwide as being able to topple their shared capitalist enemies. Why else would somebody make excuses, constantly, for jihadists, islamists, and their antidemocratic mindset, anti women, and so forth? The left in all lands serve as the Islamist enablers, and some are billionaires who lean left. Yeah, I know this is divisive, but it's sadly, accurate. Maybe, you left voters could start to vote for nationalist politicians in your countries as a push-back against the jihadist-catering pols, academics, and newsies? You could still be for social justice and spend for it, but coddling the islamists by word and deed would need to be suppressed. They do like modern weaponry, delivered into their hands by allah, to use against the Qufars (all of us). This now includes NBC weapons. -Original Message- From: Alberto G. Corona agocor...@gmail.com To: everything-list everything-list@googlegroups.com Sent: Thu, Mar 26, 2015 3:49 am Subject: Re: Life in the Islamic State for women I don´t know what to choose either the civilization of the horde of cavemen or the set of pseudo enlightened idiots that renegate of everything except themselves, that defecate over their ancestors and judge the world from the stratosphere in which they live, with little or no knowledge, maybe some mathematics, Each one a civilization on itself. 2015-03-26 7:47 GMT+01:00 Kim Jones kimjo...@ozemail.com.au: On 26 Mar 2015, at 2:21 pm, LizR lizj...@gmail.com wrote: http://www.raqqa-sl.com/en/?p=857 So most of these women are Brits? WTF! Makes your blood run cold. People are turning into zombies left right and centre. There is absolutely nothing whatsoever in organised religion for women. This whole conflict is a boys' club tribal thing. Women are necessary to the tribe because a good metric of any tribe's success is the number of willing female participants. Just ask Ghengis Kahn. Just ask the Christians; they have women dress in form-obscuring vetements as well; they are called nuns and presumably they lie around all day having erotic fantasies about being loved conveniently by Jesus without all the messy boy stuff that goes with sex. But I do think by now that that slew of apocalyptic zombie movies that the world passed through recently was some kind of cultural dream or clairvoyant nightmare about this ISIS-led zombie apocalypse we now appear to be heading for. You like that? Beheading for.. We had one young bloke here in Oz, disappeared recently to Syria to fight with IS. Anglo. Good kid with high intelligence apparently. Got hooked by the jihad thing. His mates said he had a chip on his shoulder and had turned weird. What ISIS offering apparently more convincing than life in the burbs of Sydney as a molly-coddled youngster in middle class, white supremacist Australia. ISIS said Here comes one! Stick a bomb belt on him and send him off to oblivion. Which they did; he detonated it and managed to blow up an empty car and himself. Can you be a failure as a Jihadi? This kid was. Kim -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. -- Alberto. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything
Re: Life in the Islamic State for women
The problem is that this puts all the power in the hands of big business, who don't have the interests of anyone but their shareholders at heart. Also it leads to more repressive laws. This is in fact the destruction of western democracy that is the aim of the jihadists and so on (which is in turn a reaction to western foreign policy over a long period). Sadly which particular set of suits you vote in isn't going to help when the real power is in the hands of big business (especially when you have a monolithic 2-party system where both sides have been bought out). Try voting against the TPPA and see how you get on. On 27 March 2015 at 01:55, Alberto G. Corona agocor...@gmail.com wrote: spudboy. Well said. Indeed, there are a massive change in vote from the extreme left to nationalism in countries like France, out of Fear of Islam based on direct personal experiences. (In France the islam is something that you watch everyday even if you have the TV switched off). The problem is that the natural path of these deculturalized and hedonistic leftists that had a sudden encounter with reality is a form of fascism that is an equally denaturalized and simplistic vision of reality, based on a ideological reverie, instead of a return to common sense, tradition and prudence. The fascism of the 30s was created by extreme leftists. Indeed all these antireligious idiots (sorry, this is descriptive, no demoting intended) that consider all religions equally dangerous are right in the delusional process that lean to the rediscovery of Fascism. 2015-03-26 12:04 GMT+01:00 spudboy100 via Everything List everything-list@googlegroups.com: Well, its not the new jihadists I blame, but the (yes) leftist academics, politicians, and news thugs, that have long, empowered, and made excuses for these aggressors. My suspicion is that they see the jihadists worldwide as being able to topple their shared capitalist enemies. Why else would somebody make excuses, constantly, for jihadists, islamists, and their antidemocratic mindset, anti women, and so forth? The left in all lands serve as the Islamist enablers, and some are billionaires who lean left. Yeah, I know this is divisive, but it's sadly, accurate. Maybe, you left voters could start to vote for nationalist politicians in your countries as a push-back against the jihadist-catering pols, academics, and newsies? You could still be for social justice and spend for it, but coddling the islamists by word and deed would need to be suppressed. They do like modern weaponry, delivered into their hands by allah, to use against the Qufars (all of us). This now includes NBC weapons. -Original Message- From: Alberto G. Corona agocor...@gmail.com To: everything-list everything-list@googlegroups.com Sent: Thu, Mar 26, 2015 3:49 am Subject: Re: Life in the Islamic State for women I don´t know what to choose either the civilization of the horde of cavemen or the set of pseudo enlightened idiots that renegate of everything except themselves, that defecate over their ancestors and judge the world from the stratosphere in which they live, with little or no knowledge, maybe some mathematics, Each one a civilization on itself. 2015-03-26 7:47 GMT+01:00 Kim Jones kimjo...@ozemail.com.au: On 26 Mar 2015, at 2:21 pm, LizR lizj...@gmail.com wrote: http://www.raqqa-sl.com/en/?p=857 So most of these women are Brits? WTF! Makes your blood run cold. People are turning into zombies left right and centre. There is absolutely nothing whatsoever in organised religion for women. This whole conflict is a boys' club tribal thing. Women are necessary to the tribe because a good metric of any tribe's success is the number of willing female participants. Just ask Ghengis Kahn. Just ask the Christians; they have women dress in form-obscuring vetements as well; they are called nuns and presumably they lie around all day having erotic fantasies about being loved conveniently by Jesus without all the messy boy stuff that goes with sex. But I do think by now that that slew of apocalyptic zombie movies that the world passed through recently was some kind of cultural dream or clairvoyant nightmare about this ISIS-led zombie apocalypse we now appear to be heading for. You like that? Beheading for.. We had one young bloke here in Oz, disappeared recently to Syria to fight with IS. Anglo. Good kid with high intelligence apparently. Got hooked by the jihad thing. His mates said he had a chip on his shoulder and had turned weird. What ISIS offering apparently more convincing than life in the burbs of Sydney as a molly-coddled youngster in middle class, white supremacist Australia. ISIS said Here comes one! Stick a bomb belt on him and send him off to oblivion. Which they did; he detonated it and managed to blow up an empty car and himself. Can you be a failure as a Jihadi? This kid was. Kim -- You received
Re: Life in the Islamic State for women
On 26 Mar 2015, at 2:21 pm, LizR lizj...@gmail.com wrote: http://www.raqqa-sl.com/en/?p=857 So most of these women are Brits? WTF! Makes your blood run cold. People are turning into zombies left right and centre. There is absolutely nothing whatsoever in organised religion for women. This whole conflict is a boys' club tribal thing. Women are necessary to the tribe because a good metric of any tribe's success is the number of willing female participants. Just ask Ghengis Kahn. Just ask the Christians; they have women dress in form-obscuring vetements as well; they are called nuns and presumably they lie around all day having erotic fantasies about being loved conveniently by Jesus without all the messy boy stuff that goes with sex. But I do think by now that that slew of apocalyptic zombie movies that the world passed through recently was some kind of cultural dream or clairvoyant nightmare about this ISIS-led zombie apocalypse we now appear to be heading for. You like that? Beheading for.. We had one young bloke here in Oz, disappeared recently to Syria to fight with IS. Anglo. Good kid with high intelligence apparently. Got hooked by the jihad thing. His mates said he had a chip on his shoulder and had turned weird. What ISIS offering apparently more convincing than life in the burbs of Sydney as a molly-coddled youngster in middle class, white supremacist Australia. ISIS said Here comes one! Stick a bomb belt on him and send him off to oblivion. Which they did; he detonated it and managed to blow up an empty car and himself. Can you be a failure as a Jihadi? This kid was. Kim -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Re: Life in the Islamic State for women
I don´t know what to choose either the civilization of the horde of cavemen or the set of pseudo enlightened idiots that renegate of everything except themselves, that defecate over their ancestors and judge the world from the stratosphere in which they live, with little or no knowledge, maybe some mathematics, Each one a civilization on itself. 2015-03-26 7:47 GMT+01:00 Kim Jones kimjo...@ozemail.com.au: On 26 Mar 2015, at 2:21 pm, LizR lizj...@gmail.com wrote: http://www.raqqa-sl.com/en/?p=857 So most of these women are Brits? WTF! Makes your blood run cold. People are turning into zombies left right and centre. There is absolutely nothing whatsoever in organised religion for women. This whole conflict is a boys' club tribal thing. Women are necessary to the tribe because a good metric of any tribe's success is the number of willing female participants. Just ask Ghengis Kahn. Just ask the Christians; they have women dress in form-obscuring vetements as well; they are called nuns and presumably they lie around all day having erotic fantasies about being loved conveniently by Jesus without all the messy boy stuff that goes with sex. But I do think by now that that slew of apocalyptic zombie movies that the world passed through recently was some kind of cultural dream or clairvoyant nightmare about this ISIS-led zombie apocalypse we now appear to be heading for. You like that? Beheading for.. We had one young bloke here in Oz, disappeared recently to Syria to fight with IS. Anglo. Good kid with high intelligence apparently. Got hooked by the jihad thing. His mates said he had a chip on his shoulder and had turned weird. What ISIS offering apparently more convincing than life in the burbs of Sydney as a molly-coddled youngster in middle class, white supremacist Australia. ISIS said Here comes one! Stick a bomb belt on him and send him off to oblivion. Which they did; he detonated it and managed to blow up an empty car and himself. Can you be a failure as a Jihadi? This kid was. Kim -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. -- Alberto. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
