< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 6115 OF 6115 ·
|Sep-02-14|| ||Mr. Bojangles: < Castro kills citizens who protest his rule. We don't do that.>|
What an ignorant, moron.
I guess those thousands of people of colour who were summarily killed during America's 100-year apartheid by ordinary folk as well as agents of the US government don't count.
After all there are lesser humans.
|Sep-02-14|| ||nok: Red colored or black colored?|
|Sep-02-14|| ||Colonel Mortimer: America is too busy pointing the finger at the moment for any national self-reflection. Navel gazing is for losers.|
Dropping bombs on non-americans is for heroes, patriots, freedom lovers, democracy lovers, good Christian folk, constitution believers, righteous wealth generators. In short good, honest do good Americans.
And the sick thing - people dare accuse us of misusing our birth right to make the world a better place.
|Sep-02-14|| ||HeMateMe: Bojangles, you're a no-nothing turd. Our problem was getting the races to accept one another and backing it up with laws and the National Guard, if necessary. A lot of countries have gone through that, and emerged stronger.|
I was referring to the safety of political demonstrations. We recently had a 3,000 plus march in Staten Island NYC, and there was not one arrest made. In Cuba or the old USSR, if you attempted such a thing you would get the crap beat out of you, probably arrested, and maybe even jailed for a long period of time. Same thing in present day China.
And yes, we have had protest marches in the 1960s that involved police beating up people. But, that is a blip in our overall history. Places like Cuba and China? The problem is ongoing. If you demonstrate against the regime today, you go to lock up.
|Sep-02-14|| ||Colonel Mortimer: Nowdays America prefers to lock up its citizens.
Another no.1 spot on the podium for the greatest country on earth.
|Sep-02-14|| ||Jim Bartle: Yesterday was Labor Day. Let's not forget all the attacks against demonstrations by union members in the first half of the century.|
|Sep-02-14|| ||Colonel Mortimer: And McCarthyism - when thousands of Americans were falsely accused of being communist or gay.|
And what if they were? Did it matter? Well it did - many lost their livelihoods and many went to jail.
|Sep-02-14|| ||Colonel Mortimer: Kent State shootings
<The Kent State shootings (also known as the May 4 massacre or the Kent State massacre) occurred at Kent State University in the US city of Kent, Ohio, and involved the shooting of unarmed college students by the Ohio National Guard on Monday, May 4, 1970. The guardsmen fired 67 rounds over a period of 13 seconds, killing four students and wounding nine others, one of whom suffered permanent paralysis.
Some of the students who were shot had been protesting against the Cambodian Campaign, which President Richard Nixon announced during a television address on April 30. Other students who were shot had been walking nearby or observing the protest from a distance.
There was a significant national response to the shootings: hundreds of universities, colleges, and high schools closed throughout the United States due to a student strike of four million students, and the event further affected public opinion—at an already socially contentious time—over the role of the United States in the Vietnam War.>
|Sep-02-14|| ||Colonel Mortimer: <According to Wolin, there are three main ways in which inverted totalitarianism is the inverted form of classical totalitarianism.|
• Whereas in Nazi Germany the state dominated economic actors, in inverted totalitarianism, corporations through political contributions and lobbying, dominate the United States, with the government acting as the servant of large corporations. This is considered "normal" rather than corruption.
• While the Nazi regime aimed at the constant political mobilization of the population, with its Nuremberg rallies, Hitler Youth, and so on, inverted totalitarianism aims for the mass of the population to be in a persistent state of political apathy. The only type of political activity expected or desired from the citizenry is voting. Low electoral turnouts are favorably received as an indication that the bulk of the population has given up hope that the government will ever help them.
• While the Nazis openly mocked democracy, the United States maintains the conceit that it is the model of democracy for the whole world. Wolin writes:
Inverted totalitarianism reverses things. It is all politics all of the time but a politics largely untempered by the political. Party squabbles are occasionally on public display, and there is a frantic and continuous politics among factions of the party, interest groups, competing corporate powers, and rival media concerns. And there is, of course, the culminating moment of national elections when the attention of the nation is required to make a choice of personalities rather than a choice between alternatives. What is absent is the political, the commitment to finding where the common good lies amidst the welter of well-financed, highly organized, single-minded interests rabidly seeking governmental favors and overwhelming the practices of representative government and public administration by a sea of cash.>
|Sep-02-14|| ||twinlark: God or State?
A foregoing discussion about who or what is the highest authority, the State or God (or something or someone else), causes me to once again wonder whether we are indeed hardwired into hierarchical modes of thinking.
It would explain why egalitarian philosophies never translate into egalitarian systems. Someone or something has to be top dog, the final arbiter of truth and morality, otherwise we're completely lost.
|Sep-02-14|| ||Shams: <Colonel Mortimer> You should watch this when you have some free time:
|Sep-02-14|| ||MissScarlett: <I guess those thousands of people of colour who were summarily killed during America's 100-year apartheid by ordinary folk as well as agents of the US government don't count.>|
No more than the thousands of blacks who kill each other every year in America. They don't seem to bother you much, so why shed crocodile tears over people who died decades ago? Quit your vain search for the next Emmett Till.
|Sep-02-14|| ||Colonel Mortimer: <Shams:> Excellent - enjoying it so far, thanks.|
|Sep-02-14|| ||cormier: nite nite gs ... ths G|
|Sep-02-14|| ||Colonel Mortimer: <The status of American democracy is frighteningly dismal. |
In the coming November elections, it is estimated that 60 percent of Americans will not vote. Worse, 70-80 percent of those hurting most economically, low and moderate income workers, will not be participating in the election.
Further, political consciousness in this country is extremely low, with most people not knowing who their member of Congress is or which political political parties control the U.S. House and U.S. Senate.
Meanwhile, while tens of millions of American workers have given up on the political process and no longer see government as relevant to their lives, the billionaire class is more active politically than ever before. As a result of the disastrous Citizens United Supreme Court decision, the Koch brothers, Sheldon Adelson and other billionaires will be spending hundreds of millions of dollars to elect candidates whose main function is to help the wealthiest and most powerful people become even wealthier and more powerful.
In other words, the rich are becoming richer and spend huge sums on political donations. The poor are becoming poorer and don't even vote.>
Senator Bernie Sanders
|Sep-02-14|| ||devere: <HeMateMe: I'll have to rescind my earlier comment that the 1.5 sq. miles annexed by Israel was inconsequential, because it was land already controlled by Israel, making this a cosmetic ruling.
If the story I recently read in CNN is accurate, this land is currently in use by an arab Palestinian, who farms the land, growing dates and olives. He will have to vacate the land and do something else. I don't agree with Israel annexing land that is in productive use by another group, especially farmers.>|
Under the Ottoman-era statute the Israelis have been relying on cultivated land is exempt from confiscation, so a judicial reversal is quite possible. Of course the political aspects of taking land remain, even if the legality is upheld.
The Israeli judiciary is independent and generally quite honest. The former President, Moshe Katsav, is in jail for 7 years for raping his secretary, and Netanyahu's predecessor as PM, Ehud Olmert, has been convicted of bribery and sentenced this year to 6 years in prison. There is no other country in the world I know of where laws are enforced against powerful people as strictly as in Israel. And curiously, I believe that it is also the only political jurisdiction in the world where it is illegal to lie to obtain sex. The Israelis call it rape by deception.
|Sep-02-14|| ||Jim Bartle: <And curiously, I believe that it is also the only political jurisdiction in the world where it is illegal to lie to obtain sex.>|
The private prison industry in the US would love that.
|Sep-02-14|| ||Colonel Mortimer: <High court rules: It is impossible to be Israeli>|
<Three High Court justices rejected a petition filed by several Israelis who had requested a change in the registration in their identity cards. The plaintiffs in the registration case were asking that the Interior Ministry write “Israeli” instead of making the distinction between Jewish, Arab, or Druze in their nationality category.
Headed by Supreme Court President Chief Justice Asher Grunis, the three-judge panel declared that it was not the court’s mandate to determine new categories of nationality. Justice Hanan Melcer also noted that in the current situation “citizenship and nationality were separate”, adding that there was no reason to create a new nationality that would unite the different people living in Israel under a single inclusive identity. Such a move, he insisted, “was against both the Jewish nature and the democratic nature of the State”.
The crux of the matter is that the High Court fears that if Israeli citizens are allowed to be categorised in the state registry as Israeli instead of Jewish, Arab, or Druze then the Jewish character of the state will be jeopardised. The plaintiffs, on the other hand, maintain that in its ruling the Court has, in effect, totally ignored the obligations outlined in Israel’s Declaration of Independence, which promises full equality among all of the state’s citizens, regardless of religion, race or sex.
Professor Uzzi Ornan, a Jerusalem-born 90-year-old linguist, who initiated the appeal over a decade ago, was quoted as saying, “The government consensus that has developed ignores the existence of an Israeli people that was created with the Declaration of Independence.”
“This consensus,” Ornan continued, “enables the Jewish majority to have full control over the country and to operate not for the benefit of Israeli citizens but for the benefit of the current political majority among the Jews.”>
|Sep-02-14|| ||Colonel Mortimer: The equivalent legislation in the US would require that Black people be categorised as African, Caribbean etc on their identity cards, while those of Christian faith would have "Christian" inscribed on their identity cards.|
There would be no such collective legal entity as an 'American' citizen.
Sound bizarre? Welcome to the Zionist entity of Israel, an ethnocracy for Jews - certainly not what you would call a democracy.
|Sep-02-14|| ||Abdel Irada: <“This consensus,” Ornan continued, “enables the Jewish majority to have full control over the country and to operate not for the benefit of Israeli citizens but for the benefit of the current political majority among the Jews.”>|
It should also be emphasized that this system does *not* privilege all Jewish Israelis. As a friend of mine now living in Santa Cruz makes clear, he and other (as he phrases it) "Hebrew Jews" are second-class citizens in what is supposed to be a homeland for *all* Jews.
The ruling elite, and the contingent that benefits most from its policies, he tells me, is made up of Ashkenazim from Eastern Europe, many of whom are openly racist, regarding Sephardic Jews as little more than another kind of Arabs.
Orwell described this sort of "democracy" adeptly: "All animals are equal, but some are more equal than others."
|Sep-03-14|| ||Big Pawn: Mort, your points are vapid at best.
<Perhaps you want to argue that the rule maker can also act as the rule breaker? What does that do for your <no moral objectivity without God> argument?>
Your example shows what? Nothing. A juvenile response that belies your total ignorance and naivety.
Here's the point:
You have two choices.
1. Either morality exists objectively (some things are right or wrong independent of what humans think) OR
2. morality exists only in our own minds which is to say that morality is relative - in which case it doesn't actually exist. We simply invent it as we see fit (not objective).
No one has been able to show how morality can exist objectively sans God. Be the first one!
Addressing your vapid point: if God's nature demands that he act one way and then the opposite way, in neither case does that somehow remove morality from God (as a transcendental ground for morality, the foundation of morality, the locus of moral values...).
Mort, this is a question of ontology. That is, we are asking how morality exists.
Further, God, as a maximally great being can not act immorally as he would fail then to be maximally great. This addresses the coherence of God's nature.
Also, God does not choose arbitrarily what is good and what is not. Rather, God acts in perfect harmony according to his nature. So he does make and break rules.
Lastly, the law is for humankind.
|Sep-03-14|| ||Big Pawn: <Refused: I am just trotting along the line of that <without God there's no moral> argument.>|
That's right. Sans God morality is an illusion. Ask Richard Dawkins. He agrees with me.
|Sep-03-14|| ||Big Pawn: <johnlspouge: Some Zionists currently use "Zionist" to refer to themselves, e.g.,
[ http://www.habonimdror.org/ ]
so of itself, the word cannot be considered pejorative. I could not even find a synonym on the Internet.>
According to tjst logic some blacks say @#$%*& all the time so that word isn't perjorative either.
|Sep-03-14|| ||Big Pawn: <petrosianac><Most people who believe in an objective standard at all would agree that murder violates it. No problem there. But it's common to find people who alternate between not believing in any standard and claiming that Behavior X violates the standard they said didn't exist, without noticing the contradiction.>|
Well said and completely commonsense. They see it - they just want to believe the lie.
|Sep-03-14|| ||Big Pawn: <kellmano: <petrosianac> you are effectively citing the Euthyphro dilemma as applied to the state.>|
I don't know about that. Really, the euthyphro dilemma isn't a real dilemma but still it's more like this:
Does God arbitrarily choose what is good? Or, does God somehow recognize the good which indicated that goodness exists apart from God.
The point is to salvage the idea of objective morality while keeping it apart from God, so that God is not necessary for morality to exist objectively.
A true dilemma is either A or -A. The euthyphro is A or B so there is no dilemma.
Theists posit C; God neither recognizes the good apart from himself nor arbitrarily decides what is good on a whim as it were. Rather, God's very nature is the good and his commands necessarily express his nature.
The euthyphro has long been refuted like this.
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 6115 OF 6115 ·