About
Content
Store
Forum

Rebirth of Reason
War
People
Archives
Objectivism

Post to this threadMark all messages in this thread as readMark all messages in this thread as unreadBack one pagePage 0Page 1Page 2Page 3Forward one pageLast Page


Sanction: 6, No Sanction: 0
Sanction: 6, No Sanction: 0
Post 40

Wednesday, August 16, 2006 - 9:05amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Sharon said

All of us alive today have tribalists in our genes.


Oh my god we do! Someone let them out!!! :)

Sanction: 14, No Sanction: 0
Sanction: 14, No Sanction: 0
Sanction: 14, No Sanction: 0
Post 41

Wednesday, August 16, 2006 - 9:20amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Sharon said:

Why have large numbers of people in the rest of the world found it necessary to demonstrate against US decisions and subsequent action in the Middle East?


World opinion be damned, world opinion is completely worthless. You accuse Kurt of ad hominem attacks while you resort to the fallacy of argumentum ad populum and have the audacity to then say Kurt is the one who is not being true to Objectivism? When did Rand give one shit about what the world thought of her and Objectivism? Did she acquiesce to what others wanted? Did she change her actions, her philosophy because it wasn't in accordance with world opinion?

And I quote an excellent article from Dennis Prager:



If you are ever morally confused about a major world issue, here is a rule that is almost never violated: Whenever you hear that "world opinion" holds a view, assume it is morally wrong.

And here is a related rule if your religious or national or ethnic group ever suffers horrific persecution: "World opinion" will never do a thing for you. Never.

"World opinion" has little or nothing to say about the world's greatest evils and regularly condemns those who fight evil.

The history of "world opinion" regarding the greatest mass murders and cruelties on the planet is one of relentless apathy.

Ask:

* the 1.5 million Armenians massacred by the Ottoman Turks; or

* the 6 million Ukrainians slaughtered by Stalin; or

* the tens of millions of other Soviet citizens killed by Stalin's Soviet Union; or

* the 6 million Jews murdered by the Nazis and their helpers throughout Europe; or

* the 60 million Chinese butchered by Mao; or

* the 2 million Cambodians murdered by Pol Pot; or

* the millions killed and enslaved in Sudan; or

* the Tutsis murdered by Rwanda's genocide; or

* the millions starved to death and enslaved in North Korea; or

* the million Tibetans killed by the Chinese; or

* the million-plus Afghans put to death by Brezhnev's Soviet Union.

Ask any of these poor souls, or the hundreds of millions of others slaughtered, tortured, raped and enslaved in the last 100 years, if "world opinion" did anything for them.

On the other hand, we learn that "world opinion" is quite exercised over Israel's unintentional killing of a few hundred Lebanese civilians behind whom hides Hezbollah -- a terror group that intentionally sends missiles at Israeli cities and whose announced goals are the annihilation of Israel and the Islamicization of Lebanon. And, of course, "world opinion" was just livid at American abuses of some Iraqi prisoners at the Abu Ghraib prison in Baghdad. In fact, "world opinion" is constantly upset with America and Israel, two of the most decent countries on earth, yet silent about the world's cruelest countries.

Why is this?

Here are four reasons:

First, television news.

It is difficult to overstate the damage done to the world by television news. Even when not driven by political bias -- an exceedingly rare occurrence globally -- television news presents a thoroughly distorted picture of the world. Because it is almost entirely dependent upon pictures, TV news is only capable of showing human suffering in, or caused by, free countries. So even if the BBC or CNN were interested in showing the suffering of millions of Sudanese blacks or North Koreans -- and they are not interested in so doing -- they cannot do it because reporters cannot visit Sudan or North Korea and video freely. Likewise, China's decimation and annexation of Tibet, one of the world's oldest ongoing civilizations, never made it to television.

Second, "world opinion" is shaped by the same lack of courage that shapes most individual human beings' behavior. This is another aspect of the problem of the distorted way news is presented. It takes courage to report the evil of evil regimes; it takes no courage to report on the flaws of decent societies. Reporters who went into Afghanistan without the Soviet Union's permission were killed. Reporters would risks their lives to get critical stories out of Tibet, North Korea and other areas where vicious regimes rule. But to report on America's bad deeds in Iraq (not to mention at home) or Israel's is relatively effortless, and you surely won't get killed. Indeed, you may win a Pulitzer Prize.

Third, "world opinion" bends toward power. To cite the Israel example, "world opinion" far more fears alienating the largest producers of oil and 1 billion Muslim than it fears alienating tiny Israel and the world's 13 million Jews. And not only because of oil and numbers. When you offend Muslims, you risk getting a fatwa, having your editorial offices burned down or receiving death threats. Jew's don't burn down their critics' offices, issue fatwas or send death threats, let alone act on such threats.

Fourth, those who don't fight evil condemn those who do. "World opinion" doesn't confront real evils, but it has a particular animus toward those who do -- most notably today America and Israel.

The moment one recognizes "world opinion" for what it is -- a statement of moral cowardice, one is no longer enthralled by the term. That "world opinion" at this moment allegedly loathes America and Israel is a badge of honor to be worn proudly by those countries. It is when "world opinion" and its news media start liking you that you should wonder if you've lost your way.




Post 42

Wednesday, August 16, 2006 - 9:21amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Hong and Johnathan, Kurt maybe

It's becoming clear now that your notion of history begins with colonialism.  Inconveniently, life had already been going on in Palestine; even before the Roman Campaigns.

The Ottomans and British thought that they were in charge; but, they neglected to consider the First Nations People who were there beforehand. The First Nations had no printing presses small enough to carry on the back of a camel.  Their's is an oral history of which the rest of the world is mostly ignorant.  I suspect that's part of the reason Arabs call us the People of the Book. The voice of my friend's uneducated husband burns in my ears.  "You can educate them, but you can't make them smart".  I disagree, you can teach an old dog new tricks; but the old methods will fail. Our old rule books are obsolete.

When the Jews decided that they would create a homeland in Palestine, they became the latest group of colonialists to impose themselves on primitives. Did you know they were looking at Argentina as well? www.palestinehistory.com/qtime.htm  This may be not very objective, but it will be a start.

These primitives are different.  They have sent their young to Oxford.  They have cell phones with cameras.  Colonialism is not going to work this time.  Colonialism  is the tool of religion and suppression.  The old methods are failing.  Desert survivors are the toughest on earth. The desert has taught them to overcome every brutality nature can impose. They obey and control nature.

Objectivists with a benevolent view of all humankind can bring peace to the Middle East.  If I can bring sustainable peace to irrational kindergarten warriors, think of what you lot could do in that king-sized sandbox, The Middle East. It's a developmental process from benevolent dictator to socialism to Objectivism. Am I the only one to see the elegant simplicity of this process?  Isn't this the route you took to get here? 

Both golden rules are needed.  And a big dose of new ideas. The first is: truth speaking to George Bush.

Sharon

Post 43

Wednesday, August 16, 2006 - 9:23amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Sharon:
You should spend more time in Canada.
I check in frequently with the Toronto Globe and Mail, which used to be considered a conservative newspaper by Canadian standards but unless you access alternative sources you won't be aware of what they they omit (in my view intentionally) and the slant the give to what they do present.
If my sources are not eclectic enough, please direct me elsewhere.
I did give you sources in post #25 http://www.drudgereport.com/ and Fox News. C-SPAN 2 has some great items on the weekend with Book TV. They cover the full gamut of books from ultra conservatism to outrageous liberalism but at least you get everything. Read the long list of columnists on Drudge's site, particularly Walter Williams http://www.townhall.com/columnists/walterewilliams/archive.shtml..

More recently, I have taken to listening to American National Public Radio, The British Broadcasting Corporation, Radio Netherlands, and South African Broadcast News, in addition to the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation.  Radio journalism sends me to other voices and more in depth views, online.
Well, yeah. NPR is about the most left-leaning, biased station you could listen to and the BBC and CBC are not much better. All three are publicly financed and have the agenda of the government. I know nothing about Radio Netherlands and South African Broadcast News but I suspect they are also publicly financed.

And what was it I heard about Al Jazerra (sp?) being allowed to broadcast in Canada but Fox News was prohibited, although I believe Fox is now available in Canada?

Sam


Post 44

Wednesday, August 16, 2006 - 9:35amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Found it. Al-Jazeera in Al-Canada?
But in Canada, in the biggest telecommunications uproar in decades, Al-Jazeera won approval for distribution over Canada's pristine, politically correct, airwaves. This unlikely success in Canada for an Islamist, antisemitic, pro-terrorist channel was achieved by winning a special dispensation not available to the Fox News Channel, the Italian state channel RAI, or a local Quebec City-based radio station – a dispensation full of implications.
http://www.danielpipes.org/article/2013

Sharon, do you still maintain that you're getting unbiased news? And Fox News is the most watched cable TV news channel in the US.

Sam


Sanction: 9, No Sanction: 0
Sanction: 9, No Sanction: 0
Post 45

Wednesday, August 16, 2006 - 10:56amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Sharon,
Your comparing Jewish and Israeli people's struggle for survival to colonialism is utter injustice and outrageous. I don't think I have anything more to say to you on this topic.


Post 46

Wednesday, August 16, 2006 - 11:20amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Hong,

I don't make history, I only observe it.  Things are what they are.

Sharon

Sanction: 5, No Sanction: 0
Sanction: 5, No Sanction: 0
Post 47

Wednesday, August 16, 2006 - 11:47amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
No. You distort history to suit you deeply rooted prejudice.

Post 48

Wednesday, August 16, 2006 - 11:56amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Sharon,

Calm down now. I am agreeing with most of what you said, but it's not worth getting upset over. I know this because I have done it.

Things are changing for the better, but it doesn't happen immediately. The empire is dying, and we may actually get our republic back here. The most important fact is that it is losing all its credibility.

There is a great deal of good that will and already has come from Objectivism. The first on-line forum I participated in was the Moderated Discussion of Objectivist Philosophy. It had been founded by guy named Jimmy Wales, who had just handed over his moderation duties. Today he is more famous for being a co-founder of Wikipedia.

That's probably the most revolutionary thing an Objectivist has ever done.

It is getting much more difficult to keep people in the dark. They are seeing the light on this war, and they will see the light on other things.


Post 49

Wednesday, August 16, 2006 - 12:15pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Hong,
I don't understand.  What prejudice?  Do you have another reading list for me?  

Sharon 



Post 50

Wednesday, August 16, 2006 - 12:17pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Sharon:

You have stated that you have admired Rand's thought and that you think the future can be shaped by instilling children with Objectivism but I have yet to understand what you have grabbed on to from Objectivism that gives you that view. You seem to dismiss everything that Objectivists value ... the latest being corporations.

I really want to understand where you come from and how you rationalize your opinions. Can you be specific as to how you would instill the principles of Objectivism in the children you teach? How would that deviate from mainstream approaches? What exercises would you have them do? What books would you have them read? What would they be occupied with during the school day?

What do you agree with in Objectivism, as you understand it?

Unless you can give reasonable responses I'll just throw in the towel (again).

Sam


Post 51

Wednesday, August 16, 2006 - 12:34pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Sharon:

Read
http://www.thestar.com/NASApp/cs/ContentServer?pagename=thestar/Layout/Article_Type1&call_pageid=971358637177&c=Article&cid=1155420635589

from Rodney Rawling's post  #0 on the Castro is Dead thread
and tell me that the Canadian media aren't biased.

This goes beyond anything I would have imagined, and it seems to get worse every day.

Sam


Post 52

Wednesday, August 16, 2006 - 12:44pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
http://commentisfree.guardian.co.uk/james_k_galbraith/2006/08/lets_wait_and_see.html

Here is an excellent look at the alleged plot in Britain from the perspective of someone who flew a few days ago from Britain to the US.


Post 53

Wednesday, August 16, 2006 - 12:46pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Here is yet another chapter in the continuing comedy known as the war on terror:

http://msnbc.msn.com/id/14375133/


Post 54

Wednesday, August 16, 2006 - 12:51pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Here's an article on something that could very well be a threat--anti-aircraft missiles which are portable and can be shoulder-fired:

http://www.rand.org/pubs/occasional_papers/2005/RAND_OP106.pdf


Post 55

Wednesday, August 16, 2006 - 1:01pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
"British investigators believe some of the money raised to help victims of last year's earthquake in Pakistan may have been used to fund the alleged airliner terror plot."
 
http://www.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/europe/08/15/terror.plot/index.html

This is the best article of all, and this one is also making me believe that this whole plot could be true. They believe that the money for the plot may have come from their own foreign aid.

This is, without doubt, the best argument against foreign aid you could ever find.

 


Post 56

Wednesday, August 16, 2006 - 1:15pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Sharon, you said,
 ...life had already been going on in Palestine; even before the Roman Campaigns.
Sure. Who were the inhabitants of Palestine before the Roman then?



Post 57

Wednesday, August 16, 2006 - 1:29pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit

From Time Immemorial: The Origins of the Arab-Jewish Conflict over Palestine (Paperback)
The Amazon reviews of From Time Immemorial were a mix of very positive and very negative. The negative reviews stem from the writers having doubts about the book's accuracy.


Sanction: 4, No Sanction: 0
Sanction: 4, No Sanction: 0
Post 58

Wednesday, August 16, 2006 - 11:18pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit

From Time Immemorial

I read it a couple years ago. It’s very good.

Large communities of Jews since before Rome have continuously occupied the region we call Israel/Palestine/Jordan. History records “the Jews leaving,” but that was hardly every last one. She documents the subsequent driving of the Jews from every Arab country back to Israel over the course of centuries of endless pogroms. (Kiryat Shemona, a town we have seen on the news for the last few weeks, was settled by Moroccan Jews.)

The Arabs would have it that “the Jews left” the region and then came back thousands of years later to take back what was not theirs any longer. Nonsense. Some Jews left, not “the Jews.” And they didn’t come back to take the glowing oasis that the Jews have since created and the Arabs would like now to take, but rather nearly worthless unimproved land that wasn’t being used and whose “owners” were often difficult to find, coming through with a herd of camels twice a year. The Arabs saying, “Now we want it back” is like Native Americans saying, “Now we want back—not some land in upstate New York—but Trump Plaza.”

Displaced Palestinians could make something for themselves out of any of the vast regions of the Arab world if only any of those brethren who proclaim to care so much about them were even willing to have them.

Sanction: 4, No Sanction: 0
Sanction: 4, No Sanction: 0
Post 59

Thursday, August 17, 2006 - 8:19amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit

   
Large communities of Jews since before Rome have continuously occupied the region we call Israel/Palestine/Jordan. History records “the Jews leaving,”  ...
Yes. The region was largely a Jewish state at the time. Though if you trace back further to Moses time, the Jews coming out of  Egypt did conquered the region and established their kingdoms. It was in turn conquered by the Babylonians, Persian, Alexander the Great of Macedon, and Roman. However, during most of those times the Jewish state enjoyed considerable autonomy, until the Roman Emperor Hadrian, who determined to wipe out the identity of Israel-Judah-Judea. The Romans sacked Jerusalem, Jericho, Bethlehem, suppressed several Jewish revolts, and in the end expelled Jews from the region. So the Jews did not exactly "leave", but were forced into exile.

(Edited by Hong Zhang on 8/17, 8:21am)


Post to this threadBack one pagePage 0Page 1Page 2Page 3Forward one pageLast Page


User ID Password or create a free account.