Jump to content

Theme© by Fisana
 

Photo

What would it take for Russia to be #1?


  • Please log in to reply
7545 replies to this topic

#701 woj1@cyberonic.

woj1@cyberonic.

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 10667 posts

Posted 09 August 2003 - 10:47 AM

DQ;
//The result will be a more
cooperative and civil society.//
// a stable political system?//

... in England oldest son inherits practically everything. The English law protects integrity of the wealth. Wealth is not divided. English law helps fortunes to be intact, and supports the further grow of the wealth..
In English opinion, just their inheritance law, which closed the control of families capital and assets in one hand, and consequently provided full integration of resources, built English Empire.
This inheritance law also had influence on population control, because young siblings in the families could practically only beg at the oldest one, table.

England during Empire expansion was inside very stable country. Control of the resources by the few, provided her (England) full inside stability. On other hand, her concentration of resources gives her opportunities to imperialistic wars.
What kind of the stability we are talking about it ?
  • 0

#702 Bader

Bader

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1757 posts

Posted 09 August 2003 - 11:49 AM

I still stand by the comments by Krop. who exposed the limits of Darwin.
To base a philosophy of life on a study of animals is dehumanising. This is appart from the fact that the fossil record
has no conclusive evidence for evolution and the strata doesn't support uniformitarianism and often refutes it.
The dignity of man is denied.
"can not be free from classic Darwin bloody acts" means you are once again basing philosophy on giving significance to a debased denominator (crime)
which again denies man ( NON-CRIMINAL MAJORITY) the dignity.
I don't deny these negatives exist just as there is forms of evolution or that we can learn from them but the issue is what is the factors/principles etc that life and society should be based on and rank them in order of importance. This where we differ.
All societies have laws and systems for dealing with crimes. Why then so much ruthless and bloody crimes rampent in Russia and so much deep corruption? One possibility is from a philosophy of the survival of the fittest. The western business/corporate world is the same along with deep corruption in business and politics.
Sure the fittest win, and there are many forms of winning as you
say. The US is winning, but the dignity of loosers (eg genocide of Iraqis by depleted unranium) is not to be ignored, unless one accepts they are expendable to the fittest.
The Lion would love that Philosophy as it would justify his winning position and no accountablility can be expected.
I thought marxism was opposed to class divisions
and sort to create a level social playing field, yet the winners
the upper class should have been celibrated as models instead of trying to help the "loosers".
When the Kulags were stripped of food and animals and left to starve in untold millions that makes the Jewish holocaust look like a side show- where was the winning in terms of social justice
and human dignity? (just one example) The state, an abstraction, won and those who ruled it. That regime didn't last long inspite of the price paid (gross inhumanity) and inspite of the positives.
The total of unnatural deaths and manner in which they were
perpetrated, during the last century would undoubtedly be the
greatest of any regime/government in the world-made the USSR
number one in that regard, perhaps shared with China a similar regime.
If we are talking number one today for humanity (dignity) to
excell and not number one in the use and abuse of power which another country clearly has now then why are you so protective of the underlying philosophy.
A cultural and spiritual revival should challenge all the non-Russian culture, and values and develop something new from your own historical roots and thinkers. Surely you have to go back to pre-1917 and those the USSR regime rejected to really do something new and better.
The whole world were the loosers, not just Russia and neighbours. The world is the bigger looser today than decades ago, given the increasing centralisation of power and the rise of
un-natural deaths in huge numbers across the planet.
Your people have been through it. The west is about to go into it
and a much more subtle and controlling way, and the Bio-Diversity Treaty to supposedly save the planet wants about two-thirds of the population of the world reduced (can't be done by natural means) by 2040, where else could- should the world get its wake-up call from?

( I would have to say DonQ that the principles and values that the
cooperative exemplify are the opposite to those of evolution/survial of the fittest/dialectic materialism, which is why
I hearterly support cooperatives, and hold them to be a classic example/model of how society should be based. and by the way cooperative compete with one another)
  • 0

#703 donquijote

donquijote

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 3919 posts

Posted 09 August 2003 - 05:14 PM

<I still stand by the comments by Krop. who exposed the limits of Darwin.>

Howdy Bader
I like Kropotkin too, and thoroughly agree with you except for the fact of evolution. But since we are not in theology or biology class I don't think is relevant. Let me put this way: Say, you believe we came from out of space; while someone else believes we came from Adam and Eve; and I believe in evolution. If we don't deny the fact that we are facing a manmade catastrophe and that there's a manmade solution to it, we don't have a problem. The problem would be that we either expect help for a UFOs or a divine being...:confused:

<To base a philosophy of life on a study of animals is dehumanising. This is appart from the fact that the fossil record
has no conclusive evidence for evolution and the strata doesn't support uniformitarianism and often refutes it.>

We can't do it the other way around either, the way do now. We are driving species to extinction to prove our human "superiority"... The natural order can give us a clue of where we stand and where we should be. Say anything that threatens Nature, should be considered a "crime against Humanity," no more no less...

<The dignity of man is denied.
"can not be free from classic Darwin bloody acts">

We can overcome the bloody acts not by denying competition but by channeling it some other way...

"Critics charge that humans
are naturally competitive animals -- after all, they evolved that way.
To create a perfectly cooperative society, they charge, is both
impossible and utopian. This is certainly true, but fortunately, there
is a way around it. Competition for survival is only one of the many
thousands of ways that humans compete. Humans also fulfill their desire
to compete through games, sports, contests, social status, career
status, academic status, even mating. Eliminating the need to compete
for survival would hardly eliminate the countless other ways that humans
compete. Competition could still be used to improve society, even a
sustainable one."

<( I would have to say DonQ that the principles and values that the
cooperative exemplify are the opposite to those of evolution/survial of the fittest/dialectic materialism, which is why
I hearterly support cooperatives, and hold them to be a classic example/model of how society should be based. and by the way cooperative compete with one another)>

Cooperatives is the best solution. So good they could even compete with the lion's corporations on equal footing...;)

http://webspawner.com/users/donquijote
  • 0

#704 donquijote

donquijote

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 3919 posts

Posted 09 August 2003 - 05:29 PM

<England during Empire expansion was inside very stable country. Control of the resources by the few, provided her (England) full inside stability. On other hand, her concentration of resources gives her opportunities to imperialistic wars.
What kind of the stability we are talking about it ? >

Howdy Woj
And yet the British lion had better manners than today's lions. The other day I was watching 'Napoleon' on video, and the English gave him twice the opportunity to an honorable exile, while today we just smoke 'em out caves and shoot them on the spot. A wilder Law of the Jungle, where the lions play with nuclear weapons. Scary indeed...:confused:

http://webspawner.com/users/donquijote
  • 0

#705 Bader

Bader

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1757 posts

Posted 09 August 2003 - 08:59 PM

The discussion is getting a bit more meaty and therefore of greater value.
It is not humanity in my view that is proving superiority to nature,
to the detrement of its and therefore our future well being. It is the LION.
If it was humanity then your argument has a good base, but you and I are anti-Lion. The other side of this issue is that regarding what kind of hidden-hand rings the changes (evolution).
Therefore I argue there are two different situations and you are mixing the two. Sort out the LIon and we can bring our environment back into a sane world. No Lion no Problemo,no?
(well, not a perfect world but a socially just one)
You either make the Lion expendable or humanity, which ever you blame. The Bio-Diversity treaty which came out of the 92
Earth Summit and the UN tried to get US reps to sign without reading it as I said requires about two thirds of man to be
removed off the planet to save nature (its solution).
Now this external prescription/law (Rabbinic like messiah state)that reduces people to chattels that are expendable that was the fundamental philosophy of the
Soviet Union and the UN is here again in this treaty, we are talking billions of people being expendable not tens of millions
(USSR) this time to fulfill one view of how all life should be managed. And how long did the USSR last and you and others are looking already for a better way.
Who is going to say sorry, too late, for the billions who have to go, later (when the Lion is by passed and remains in power) and no changes for the better as expected (again!)
The major issues/crisies are the result of the Lion to bring humanity to the place where there is only a global and desperate solution that the Lion has already worked out. It will be out of the frying pan into the fire. (that is why I have never bothered to ask Mach-h why he was pessemistic about the future)
Who denies competition, the western world is based on it!
The greatest competition is for the hearts and minds of MAN(worship), because it is the greatest treasure.
I agree, it is either an Unidentified ........ or the Creator.
It was said Donq, that it was easier to get ancient Israel out of Egypt than to get Egypt out of Israel.
cheers,
  • 0

#706 donquijote

donquijote

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 3919 posts

Posted 09 August 2003 - 09:44 PM

<The discussion is getting a bit more meaty and therefore of greater value.>

And high quality meat! The prove that the lion is *stupid* is the fact that he resists change, even when he threatens himself and the rest of the jungle, and while we keep offering him the best meat there is. An example is the book 'Natural Capitalism,' in which very juicy meat is offered at him--plenty of business ideas--and he refuses, not to bother some web of complicity he has created over the course of ages. He refuses *evolution* and in so doing he dooms everybody...

<It is not humanity in my view that is proving superiority to nature,
to the detrement of its and therefore our future well being. It is the LION.
If it was humanity then your argument has a good base, but you and I are anti-Lion. >

I know, but I just want to emphasize that the lion is not only a physical entity but a *tendency* which we may have in our nature. To be sure, the Bolsheviks threw out a lion only to put another in place, but they hid for a long time and many other people did too. We must not hide him but always be vigilant for him or else we may repeat the same mistake.

<The other side of this issue is that regarding what kind of hidden-hand rings the changes (evolution).
Therefore I argue there are two different situations and you are mixing the two. Sort out the LIon and we can bring our environment back into a sane world. No Lion no Problemo,no?
(well, not a perfect world but a socially just one)
You either make the Lion expendable or humanity, which ever you blame. >

Well the blame may not be the lion's alone, but he sure got the 'lion share' of it.;)

<The Bio-Diversity treaty which came out of the 92
Earth Summit and the UN tried to get US reps to sign without reading it as I said requires about two thirds of man to be
removed off the planet to save nature (its solution).
Now this external prescription/law (Rabbinic like messiah state)that reduces people to chattels that are expendable that was the fundamental philosophy of the
Soviet Union and the UN is here again in this treaty, we are talking billions of people being expendable not tens of millions
(USSR) this time to fulfill one view of how all life should be managed. >

The same thing with all great lions: 3 million French soldiers died to make Napoleon great...

<And how long did the USSR last and you and others are looking already for a better way.
Who is going to say sorry, too late, for the billions who have to go, later (when the Lion is by passed and remains in power) and no changes for the better as expected (again!)
The major issues/crisies are the result of the Lion to bring humanity to the place where there is only a global and desperate solution that the Lion has already worked out. It will be out of the frying pan into the fire. (that is why I have never bothered to ask Mach-h why he was pessemistic about the future)>

If you analize my signature, you'll see that the fate of the jungle remains in the hands of the indifferent many. But I can tell you that most of the little people are responding well to this campaign...

<Who denies competition, the western world is based on it!>

Maybe the best way to beat it is to acknowledge it and put it to use in a nice way. We always need circus lions...;)

<The greatest competition is for the hearts and minds of MAN(worship), because it is the greatest treasure.
I agree, it is either an Unidentified ........ or the Creator.
It was said Donq, that it was easier to get ancient Israel out of Egypt than to get Egypt out of Israel.
cheers, >

We don't need the pharaohs to build pyramids. For that matter, who needs the pyramids anyway?;)

No Lion No Problem!

http://webspawner.com/users/donquijote
  • 0

#707 Bader

Bader

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1757 posts

Posted 10 August 2003 - 04:38 AM

late MM was a Britsh Journalist and intellectual. His father was a
Fabian Socialist and as boy was exposed to high powered Fabian conversation. Married a neice of leading British Fabians Sydney and Beatrice Webb who were upheld as heros by the Soviet
leaders.
In 1930s he was a journalist- foreign correspondent in Moscow for the Guardian.
A section of his speach in 1979 to students in Michigan U.S. titled
The Great Liberal Death Wish as used in a newsletter is:
" The thing that impresses me, the thing that touched off my awareness of the great liberal death wish, my sense that Western Man was, as it were, sleepwalking into his own ruin, the extraordinary performance of the liberal intelligensia, who, in those days, flocked to Moscow like pilgrims to Mecca. And they were one and all utterly delighted and excited by what they saw there. Clergymen walked serenely and happily through the anti-God museums, politicians claimed that no system of society could possibly be more equitable and just, lawyers admired Soviet justice, and economists praised the Soviet economy. They all wrote articles in this sense which we resident journalists knew were completely nonsensical."
Muggeridge was at pains to say he put the source of the liberal disease at the elevation of man to the centre of the universe.
"The efforts that man make to bring about their own happiness, their own ease of life, their own self-indulgence, will in due course produce the opposite, leading me to the absolutely inescapable conclusion that human beings cannot live and operate in this world without some concept of a being greater than themselves, and of a purpose which transcends their own egotistic or greedy desires. Once you eliminate the notion of
God, a creator, once you eliminate the notion that the creator has a purpose for us and that life consists essentially in fulfilling that purpose, then you are bound, as Pascal points out, to induce the megalomania of which we've seen so many manifestations in our time-- in the crasy dictators, as in the lunacies of the people who are rich, or who consider themselves to be important or celebrated in the Western World. Alternatively, human beings relapse into mere carnality, into being animals."
MM became a Christian late in life as Darwin and Tolstoy.
MM brings a new concept - devolution- as opposed to evolution
of man. Modern history bares it out, inspite of technical progress
we (in our leaders and our systems) are regressing in terms of human inhumanity towards humanity in the way the planet and its resources are abused and yet "rationed" in order to control and derive power. And then there is the painful truth of DonQ's signature re the indifference of the majority.
  • 0

#708 Bader

Bader

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1757 posts

Posted 10 August 2003 - 11:04 AM

"People whose lives are barren and insecure seem to show a greater willingness to obey than people who are self-sufficient and self-confident. To the frustrated, freedom from responsibility is more attractive than freedom from restraint. They are eager to barter their independance for the relief of the burdens of willing, deciding and being responsible for inevitable failure. They willingly abdicate the directing of their lives to those who want to plan, command and shoulder all responsibilities."
Eric Hoffe
"The True Believer"


For an example of what can happen when one resists evolution
(in line with U.S. foreign policy):

checkout joevialls.co.uk/transposition/marriott.html
  • 0

#709 woj1@cyberonic.

woj1@cyberonic.

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 10667 posts

Posted 10 August 2003 - 11:43 AM

Bader; //"People whose lives are barren and insecure seem to show a greater willingness to obey than people who are self-sufficient and self-confident//

US have the highest in the world percent of population in prison. How you would interpreter this fact in light of Eric Hoffe
  • 0

#710 woj1@cyberonic.

woj1@cyberonic.

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 10667 posts

Posted 10 August 2003 - 12:54 PM

Muggeridge ;// inescapable conclusion that human beings cannot live and operate in this world without some concept of a being greater than themselves....
Once you eliminate the notion ofGod, a creator, then you are bound, to induce the megalomania human beings relapse into mere carnality, into being animals.//

Darvin theory is just precisely result of notion of God as a creator. Darvin theory dictates presents of God creator, so when notion of God eliminated,
  • 0

#711 donquijote

donquijote

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 3919 posts

Posted 10 August 2003 - 07:35 PM

Muggeridge ;// inescapable conclusion that human beings cannot live and operate in this world without some concept of a being greater than themselves....
Once you eliminate the notion ofGod, a creator, then you are bound, to induce the megalomania human beings relapse into mere carnality, into being animals.//

Pick your meaning of religion...

I go for science, but if you push me for religion, I'll stick to the Indians and the Greeks.;)

[In the old religion of the Indians in New Mexico] the whole life-effort of man was to get his life into direct contact with the elemental life of the cosmos.... To come into immediate felt contact, and so derive energy, power, and a dark sort of joy. This effort into sheer naked contact, without an intermediary or mediator, is the root meaning of religion.

-D.H. (David Herbert) Lawrence (1885
  • 0

#712 donquijote

donquijote

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 3919 posts

Posted 10 August 2003 - 09:49 PM

Some food for thought...

?sop. (Sixth century B.C.) Fables.

The Wolf and the Lamb

ONCE upon a time a Wolf was lapping at a spring on a hillside when, looking up, what should he see but a Lamb just beginning to drink a little lower down.
  • 0

#713 donquijote

donquijote

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 3919 posts

Posted 10 August 2003 - 11:13 PM

<I believe if people are immigrating the influx itself would create more jobs. World justice would certainly be a plus if everyone could agree to the same laws. I honestly wish that people could travel the world freely without any immigration problems. But that I realize is not realistic. I do however believe that people are growing as a unit. So perhaps this will be feasible in the future. Smile I know for person reasons I sure hope so.>


Hi Kaleena
A world without borders would certainly be the best solution. NO IMMIGRATION (THERE WOULDN'T BE RICH AND POOR COUNTRIES) and NO TERRORISM (NO TARGETTING OF PARTICULAR COUNTRIES AS THE WORLD WOULD BE ONE).

Just look how good the corporations are doing...;)

http://webspawner.com/users/donquijote
  • 0

#714 donquijote

donquijote

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 3919 posts

Posted 10 August 2003 - 11:49 PM

"all that is best in the world is also ours."

Hey Bader, Sourabh
You are gonna like this. We are right on the money... Sen, a Nobel Laurate, believes in the same things we do.

And, Sourabh, you are going to be doubly pleased...

Tagore is the most famous in a distinguished school of Bengali thinkers who have left a lasting mark on the Indian social and intellectual landscape. Known as the Bengali bhadralok (or "gentlemen"), they include the filmmaker Satyajit Ray, the freedom fighter Aurobindo Ghose, the author Nirad Chaudhuri, and now, as the standard-bearer in the dying days of that tradition, Sen himself. From the nineteenth century onward bhadralok have been India's version of public intellectuals -- engaged with social life, battling against such evils as untouchability and suttee (the practice of widow-burning). They have been adamantly outward-looking, eager to absorb the best of competing traditions and methods. Tagore was proud to be an Indian, and he was in many ways a traditionalist; but he was not, as Sen wrote in an article for The New York Review of Books, "a prisoner of the past." His method was akin to what the anthropologist Claude Levi-Strauss called "bricolage" -- the drawing together of diverse traditions and ideas into a new reality. Sen called attention to this method that day at Santiniketan. Paraphrasing his teacher, he reminded the assembled crowd that in Tagore's view, "all that is best in the world is also ours."

(snip)

Sen takes up all the familiar battle cries: democracy, culture, human rights, gender rights, education, health care -- these matter to people, he says, and cannot be sacrificed at the altar of what Gandhi called "the monster god of materialism."

full text...

http://www.theatlant...c/9912kapur.htm
  • 0

#715 Bader

Bader

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1757 posts

Posted 11 August 2003 - 10:57 AM

Howdy Woj1,

I took the quote to be basically social/political rather than law and order.
One could first discuss what is barren and insecure as they may not be material but they need to be somewhat opposite to
self-sufficient and self-confident which clearly extend beyond the material.
I think the author is trying to make truisms and thus stereotyps and absolutes are out of place. I have no knowledge of the
origin of the quote, I suspect it was a satire and nothing to do with religion.
The self-...... are clearly less dependant so the first may be seen
to be the lower class who are more dependant and dependants
tend to be reliant on/obedient to benefactors (governments).
I expect that the lower class as more numerous in prisons of all
nations, and then again why single out the U.S., since they also
have dependants who rely on social policy to get by.
I knew the U.S. had the biggest prison pop, per head of pop in
the world and Pres. Bush when govnr had a pretty "proud" deathrow record. There are probably a number of factors that
have caused this but none-the-less it's ugly and almost racist.
I read an article recently that tried to disect this and it indicated the depth of drug abuse and its revenues for politics etc
including linking in the CIA and Afghanistan (opium) in that sleezy mess.

Regards comments in response to Muggeridge:
I wasn't sure exactly what you have said, I took it you are saying
that God created the process of evolution, that to reject
evolution results in the same as Mugg. said about rejecting God,
and lastly a over assumption about the status of man rather than that he is the master of the universe was unhealthy- which then would follow that a healthy man at his station (as master..) makes for a healthy universe.
Well Adam was put in charge of this world but the Lion (of lions) got in the way- hence no healthy world, ill health=conflict=Hegelian
dynamic, successive levels/series of conflict=evolution=Lions plan= god of this world.
There are two classes of people who will never worship the Lion
when he emerges as the hero of world peace and order. They are the genuine believers in God and the genuine athiests. What do you suppose will happen to those who will not bow down? What does history tell us despots do with unwanted citizenry?
  • 0

#716 woj1@cyberonic.

woj1@cyberonic.

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 10667 posts

Posted 11 August 2003 - 11:38 AM

Donquijote;
Repeated after
  • 0

#717 woj1@cyberonic.

woj1@cyberonic.

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 10667 posts

Posted 11 August 2003 - 12:32 PM

Bader; //There are two classes of people who will never worship the Lion
when he emerges as the hero of world peace and order. They are the genuine believers in God and the genuine atheists.//

To tell you truth I hadn
  • 0

#718 MarquisDeSade

MarquisDeSade

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 59 posts

Posted 11 August 2003 - 01:07 PM

The world has a beautiful and amazing system of nature that we still havnt fully comprehend the mechanisms of it. irregardless of the lion, lamb,foxes...if the role of each individual perform with benefit for the society and others in mind, i truly believe it would be productive and progressive - curitiba works in this manner. and, the diversity of the nature made the world a beautiful place. ultimately, it's about choices. if everyone is the same, who is going to be different?

to change needs power and with power come great responsibility. are you up to it? it's a question we all have to ask ourselves.
  • 0

#719 donquijote

donquijote

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 3919 posts

Posted 11 August 2003 - 04:09 PM

<Sociology Scientists decided to convince the world that proper education and training can teach the cooperation between even lion and lamb. Result of experiment was lamb sitting with apathetic lion in one cage in ZOO.
Crowds congratulated the outcome. Everything plays just fine to the moment when one visitor asked Zoo keeper, where he came across such a lion.
? No problem with the lion, problem is only with cost of 3 lambs per day for lion-s early breakfast. ?>

THE FRIENDLY LION

Once upon a time there was a Black Sheep who was rejected by her sisters the white sheep... One day though a friendly lion approached her and told her: "Why don't you jump outside the fence where the grass is greener?" She, suspecting foul play, said: "You would eat me." The Lion, insisting, said: "You look so skinny, that you wouldn't make a bite for me." Then the Black Sheep, remembering how how hungry her sisters kept her, and realizing the logic of the friendly lion, jumped to the other side...

And it was this way that she grew beautiful and plumpy. Then the Lion approached her again. "I bet you your sisters wouldn't recognize you by now," he said. "They would die of envy," he added.

Her sisters, upon seeing her, having turned into the best looking sheep they've ever seen, and realizing how friendly the Lion really was, jumped themselves to the other side. And it was said that they themselves became beautiful and plumpy. In fact it was almost Paradise if it wasn't for the fact that one disappeared now and then...;)

http://webspawner.com/users/donquijote
  • 0

#720 woj1@cyberonic.

woj1@cyberonic.

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 10667 posts

Posted 12 August 2003 - 10:28 AM

donquijote ; // Cooperatives is the best solution. So good they could even compete with the lion's corporations on equal footing... //

yes it is true, but...
Cooperatives which could compete with the lion's corporations on equal footing can only exist in uncorrupt societies.
How to provide and sustain uncorrupt societies in presence of the lion's corporations?
Which systems are more open for corruption; the democratic or totalitarian?
  • 0




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

Copyright © 2016 Pravda.Ru