The Big Easy

Post questions or suggestions here.
MKFaizi

Post by MKFaizi » Wed Sep 07, 2005 11:55 am

I love the country but I can't stand the scene
I'm like those garbage bags that time cannot decay
I'm junk but I'm still holding up this little wild bouquet
Democracy is coming to the USA.

Write what you think to whatever blog you choose. Look at how close Howard Dean came to winning the election on blog alone.

I believe that change is eminent.

People can force change.

Faizi

User avatar
Jamesh
Posts: 1526
Joined: Fri Jul 22, 2005 3:44 pm

Post by Jamesh » Wed Sep 07, 2005 3:39 pm

As a person who dislikes greed, this little disaster makes me feel better. It is a terrific little disaster to bring into focus the stupidity of modern times.

Trouble is I want a few million dead, not just a few thousand, not just 150 billion damage.

avidaloca
Posts: 231
Joined: Wed Dec 26, 2001 6:24 pm
Contact:

Post by avidaloca » Wed Sep 07, 2005 8:40 pm

In Australia, we're always rescuing rich yachtsman, many from other countries, with naval ships and helicopters. God knows how much tax payer money goes into that. I guess the implication is that if we can do that, we'll do great when it comes to saving our locals. But I think that it would be pretty similar to Katrina. We like the big grand gestures but when it comes to the multitudes the drive isn't there - who cares about them, the faceless, lifeless masses, let them perish. We should cut out the millions we spend saving rich yachstman and build up our resources and focus for normal everyday people. If you've got the money to sail around the country in a yacht, you got the money to save yourself also. We shouldn't look to them as an example for what the majority can expect if they are in the same need because as we have seen, that example is an extremely dangerous illusion.

I bet the medical navy ship which was in the Gulf Coast when the hurricane struck would have been used to save a yachstman for a feelgood news story but not for the thousands who really needed it. It could hold 600 sick people and make 100,000 litres of fresh water a day but was never used despite being right off the coast of New Orleans.

User avatar
DHodges
Posts: 1531
Joined: Tue Jan 22, 2002 8:20 pm
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Contact:

Democracy

Post by DHodges » Wed Sep 07, 2005 11:39 pm

I don't have much faith in democracy as it currently works. When half the population thinks Bush is a good choice for President, democracy has problems.

Any system of government is only as good as the people in it. For democracy to have good results, the people need to be not only involved, but to be educated, to understand the issues and be able to make informed judgements about them. Otherwise, the vote goes to whoever has the most dollars to spend on propaganda.

So, I'm thinking that education should be a nation's number one priority.

They say a people get the government they deserve. If most people don't care, then politics goes to the people who do care - the people that have a lot of money to gain if things go a certain way.

I also think a government should have a consistent foreign policy, and part of that policy should be to not meddle in the internal affairs of other countries.

A lot to think about.

MKFaizi

Post by MKFaizi » Thu Sep 08, 2005 9:45 am

But I am not asking you to have faith in the way so called democracy is working now. I am asking you to have faith the possibility of a more enlightened government. I don't mean, of course, enelightened all the way of to Buddha. I mean, relative to what we have now enlightenment.

I do think it is possible to motivate people to vote. I do think it is possible to effect change. As you said, a people get the government they deserve. If we deserve better, we need to get it and I do sense that people are fed up -- even here in Christianity USA. I do sense that people are tired of greed voting.

Democracy is coming to the USA.

I just got an email from John Kerry. I reckon I will write back to the dude. Been a while.

See ya.

Faizi

MKFaizi

Post by MKFaizi » Thu Sep 08, 2005 12:53 pm

Jamesh,

I appreciate your sentiment and I well understand your feeling. But, personally, I have a big problem with thousands of people dying untimely for any reason -- such as the Bush War in Iraq, for example. I have a personal problem with people dying for nothing or for ineptitude. For stupidity, for another example. It is one thing for people to die from their own stupidity though it is my best hope that I might die from my own stupidity rather than the stupidity of any other or others. I especially have a fond hope that I may not die for the stupidity of politicians and war mongers.

Inshallah.

I just watched an interview by John Stewart with Marc Siegel, author of the book called False Alarm. I kind of got the inkling that this book is an aside from The Power of Nightmares.

Then, I googled the Book of Revelations -- because Christians believe so much in that crap. I do think it is crap. I mean, everybody thinks that so and so is the antichrist or the beast. Before the end of the Cold War, the land of Gog and Magog was the Soviet Union. But there are a lot of people convinced that these are the End Days and, God knows, George Bush believes the crap. He said God told him to strike Al Qaeda.

What a coincidence. God told Al Qaeda to strike the US.

We really need to remove religion of any kind from the equation.

We really need to get religion out of the presidency. The dude's a nut. His presidency needs to send his idiotic kind

Ever read The Late Great Planet Earth?

Total bullshit. We still have the same bullshit but now we have DVDs and the internet.

So, give me some exact numbers. How many people do you want dead? From what sectors?

What is God telling you?

PS -- Sorry for my misspelling if imminent.

Faizi

User avatar
Jamesh
Posts: 1526
Joined: Fri Jul 22, 2005 3:44 pm

Post by Jamesh » Thu Sep 08, 2005 5:16 pm

Marsha - don't have time to go into detail just at present, but here are some comments I made elsewhere that are maybe a little relevant. And yes - separation of powers between religion and government is paramount.

"I’m one of these people who more or less believes in the motto's “whatever doesn’t kill you makes you stronger” and "the only things worth having are those one strives for".

Applying this to the human race I come up with -

In order for the human race to get serious about managing for the future then significant hardship and turmoil will be required to make us focus on actually doing the hard things that are required. If we do this then it will have a better chance of survival. If we continue to use valuable resources purely for our entertainment, then quite frankly we will not deserve survival – however it will not be us – but our children who will have to suffer for our greed.

I just think a major disaster will focus our attention on preparing a safer future for our children. Now this is almost impossible – either the situation must get so bad that we are willing to forgo certain luxuries now [like wasting money on fashion] or the world community must become more globally conscious and more humane across the board – which simply is not going to happen. Capitalism is a big problem. Those who promote business expansion and greed in consumers, must somehow be silenced. The best way would be to force governments to act against waste and greed – this is not going to happen either – therefore something else is needed and that is a natural disaster. I would prefer the change catalyst to be a few million in say an earthquake in the US, where the vices of capitalism are most rampant, superpowered even, than for some form of bird flu or similar worldwide catastrophe.

Sure, I admit a massive loss of life in the US could cause other worse problems – like the country being attacked by China while it is on its knees. The loss of the US as a superpower could cause one of the things I dread the most, namely the spread of nukes to more and more countries, particularly Muslim countries (we are assured of the annihilation of the human race if this occurs). It could shift the balance of world power to the regressive cultures, like those of Muslim countries. I admit such outcomes would be a worse disaster – which is why I do not desire a disaster of mega proportions – I don’t want one that cuts off the arms and legs of the West, just one that causes really significant pain and can be overcome.

I am not the least bit concerned about the worldwide economic disaster that would ensue – as that is precisely what I want. We need to be toughened up a bit, we need to be made more responsible to the future, we need to be forced to become more rational. Rest assured one day such a disaster will happen. The thing that annoys me so much about New Orleans is that it was very much preventable."

User avatar
Diebert van Rhijn
Posts: 6469
Joined: Fri Jun 03, 2005 4:43 pm

Post by Diebert van Rhijn » Thu Sep 08, 2005 9:45 pm

Some thoughts:

Separation of state and church: old crappy tired delusion. It ignores what is really state and what is religion. Think about it: if religion is based on a falsehood, would you want it to have any power at all to shape and form millions of minds in their churches, mosques, websites, schools and families? Do you really think those are the places where it won't hurt anyone? Or couldn't create millions of delusional voters?

And if you would see religion not as a falsehood why would you leave it outside the governing process since truth wouldn't hurt a country?

To make it worse: state is a form of religion, with its ideals and loyalty and foremost: the willingness of people to sacrifice themselves for it in great numbers. In the past this was more openly when a religious doctrine was officially attached. Since the rise of atheism and science we prefer to leave mystical, theocentric religions out of the base for the law. But where do you want to see the laws based on then? Logic, reason, compassion, some form of humanitarian thought or Christianity derived value?

Another question, who are more stupid: the haves or the have nots? The greater problem of this day and age is not the growing divide between rich and poor, but the fact that the "stupidity divide" is getting smaller, that is: the people with money and power are getting just as clueless as the ones craving for it (the 'poor').

The ones having a clue and those craving for one, are just not on the radar. Indeed we are living in the end of times, time has stopped, there's no ending to it but a slow suffocating fade which could take for ever.

If only wisdom might survive.

User avatar
DHodges
Posts: 1531
Joined: Tue Jan 22, 2002 8:20 pm
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Contact:

Separation of coven and state

Post by DHodges » Thu Sep 08, 2005 10:39 pm

Diebert van Rhijn wrote:Separation of state and church: old crappy tired delusion. It ignores what is really state and what is religion. Think about it: if religion is based on a falsehood, would you want it to have any power at all to shape and form millions of minds in their churches, mosques, websites, schools and families? Do you really think those are the places where it won't hurt anyone? Or couldn't create millions of delusional voters?
Strictly my opinions:
Churches seem to do well when they are oppressed. Churches should not be oppressed, but they should not be supported in any way. The tax breaks that churches get are effectively a subsidy.

But freedom of thought, and freedom of speech, are important issues. People must be free to consider any idea, no matter how far-fetched or incoherent. Those principles are, I think, more important than suppressing certain ideas that may be harmful.

Suppression does not work anyway. Some people find that to be evidence that there is, in fact, something "real" there. ("What the government doesn't want you to know about UFOs!")

It's true that a state has certain similarities to a religion. In particular, a large part of the strength of a state comes from the fact that people believe in it.
And if you would see religion not as a falsehood why would you leave it outside the governing process since truth wouldn't hurt a country?
Churches are a little too outside of government, in the sense that they can claim anything they want, have tax breaks, are exempt from proper accounting standards, and so on. People are sometimes exempted from particular laws because of religious beliefs they have.

To me, this special treatment of churches undermines the credibility of the state.

User avatar
DHodges
Posts: 1531
Joined: Tue Jan 22, 2002 8:20 pm
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Contact:

New Orleans

Post by DHodges » Sat Sep 10, 2005 12:16 am

Could have racism have had something to do with the slow response in New Orleans?

Laura Bush called the very idea "disgusting":
http://www.cnn.com/2005/POLITICS/09/08/ ... index.html

User avatar
Diebert van Rhijn
Posts: 6469
Joined: Fri Jun 03, 2005 4:43 pm

Re: Separation of coven and state

Post by Diebert van Rhijn » Sat Sep 10, 2005 12:40 am

DHodges wrote:Churches seem to do well when they are oppressed. Churches should not be oppressed, but they should not be supported in any way.
True enough, the Roman Empire before Constantine and the USSR are two good examples. The Jewish faith seems to have hardened under oppression extremely well to the point that it's hardly to see any real reform coming within the fundamentalists even thousands of years after its introduction.

However, religious organisations do even better with the support of idealistic millionaires and billionaires, combined with large media campaigns. Not sure the State is needed anymore to get influential in society, now capital is so private.
To me, this special treatment of churches undermines the credibility of the state.
Should they give special treatment, tax-breaks and so on to full-time philosophers? :)

If a state is considered to be responsible for the health of its citizens perhaps some stimulation of thought and wisdom should be part of their policy? And if they would refrain from *any* stimulation of the spiritual, where would a constitution than be based on? Some form of neutral materialism? Consensus behavioral rules? Trial and error?

avidaloca
Posts: 231
Joined: Wed Dec 26, 2001 6:24 pm
Contact:

Post by avidaloca » Sat Sep 10, 2005 1:37 am

Should they give special treatment, tax-breaks and so on to full-time philosophers? :)
The very guy who runs this forum, David Quinn, gets special treatment from the government and he is nothing but a full-time philosopher. They've put him on a Disability support pension which is %20 more than unemployment benefits and on top of that he doesn't have to look for work or work for free for the government (which those still unemployed at six months have to do). And he gets free rail travel and many other travel and utility concessions that the unemployed don't. He's not even disabled, just a full-time philosopher, so doesn't even need the extra benefits and money.

User avatar
DHodges
Posts: 1531
Joined: Tue Jan 22, 2002 8:20 pm
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Contact:

Re: Separation of coven and state

Post by DHodges » Sat Sep 10, 2005 4:33 am

Diebert van Rhijn wrote:If a state is considered to be responsible for the health of its citizens perhaps some stimulation of thought and wisdom should be part of their policy?
Certainly education should be a large part of the responsibility of the state. However, I don't think it is possible to teach wisdom, generally, to an entire population. Wisdom is something you find by looking for it.

The state is - to some extent - responsible for the health of its citizens, in promoting a culture and environment that encourages health.

But some things - like mandatory exercise or outlawing junk food - would be unreasonable infringements on personal liberty.
And if they would refrain from *any* stimulation of the spiritual, where would a constitution than be based on? Some form of neutral materialism? Consensus behavioral rules? Trial and error?
The basis for governmental power lies in the consent of the governed. That's is part of why education is so important. An ignorant populace can not meaningfully give consent. An ignorant population is an invitation to exploitation. Ignorance allows consent to be manufactured by cheap rhetorical devices.

avidaloca
Posts: 231
Joined: Wed Dec 26, 2001 6:24 pm
Contact:

Post by avidaloca » Sat Sep 10, 2005 5:06 am

but some things - like mandatory exercise or outlawing junk food - would be unreasonable infringements on personal liberty.
Mandatory exercise is likely going too far but I think many parts of the Western world will start forcing junk food makers to limit the fat content and add a minimal nutritional value within the next two or three decades. It's just something governments haven't addressed yet.

As the link between obesity and unnecessarily high-fat/sugar/chemical foods becomes more established in people's consciousness, governments will be forced to act to control astronomical health costs resulting from these foods, especially as their populations age. It could become, for example, illegal for a certain quantity of food to contain more than a certain percentage of fat.

This would be a huge benefit to human health and save governments billions. The sacred American need to preserve liberty at all costs may simply have to give way to sensible controls if governments are to foot most of the bill for obesity and heart-related illnesses.

MKFaizi

Post by MKFaizi » Sat Sep 10, 2005 1:17 pm

Laura Bush, hell. What about Bush Mama's remarks after visiting the Astrodome?

I don't have the exact quotes but here is the paraphrase:

"These people are better off now than before the storm."

"It's a little scary but a lot of these people plan to stay in Texas."

Well, I strongly feel that poor people, by nature, should be spread around. I mean, maybe this New Orleans evacuation thing might be the start of a trend. We could likewise evacuate all the poor from Baltimore and Detroit. Just get 'em out and sell the real estate at exorbiant prices to rich people.

In fact, it might just be a good idea to keep poor people on buses for years to come. Keep 'em movin.' Set up housing in old shopping malls and abandoned army bases. Set up sweat shops to employ them and get the US out of the import shadow of China and India and Pakistan. Kids can work, too. With a sweat shop system, no need to educate them.

It's the American way. I reckon we need this sort of catharsis.

I mean, they would definitely be better off than before the storm.

Faizi

MKFaizi

Post by MKFaizi » Sat Sep 10, 2005 1:45 pm

Nothing but a full time philosopher.

What if he was Vincent Van Gogh or Jesus. Then, would it be all right?

I have heard this argument about David Quinn and others being on the dole for years. Personally, I would not want to be on the dole. In the US, there is not any dole. There is some scant welfare benefits but most of it goes to children.

For me, being on the dole would be more of a hassle than going to so called work for eight hours a day. I have been doing that for so long that is has become largely meaningless. It is simply what I have to do to survive. There is nothing great about it. It is not rewarding in any way.

I cannot speak for David Quinn and others, of course. But I reckon the dole is not that different from a job. Yes, he may be fortunate that he can dedicate his waking hours to the pursuit of wisdom and good for him if that is what he does. I do not have that opportunity.

But I got a first row seat as a witness to complete ignorance and sorrow. I am an observer from the inside. I am often disgusted by what I see and hear. But that is, in a way, as much of a gift as David's freedom from the workplace.

I think a lot of people get jealous of someone who can get money for doing what he wants to do and nothing else. I have no such jealousy. Bully for him. I have gotten to the point that a mere eight hours of so called work is nothing. I can do it with one hand tied behind my back. It is the thinking that is the burden. It is the thinking that adds the weight.

The burden is worthwhile. It is exactly what I want. It is pretty much a part of my biological make up. I have to do it.

I do not think it matters that a thinker is on the dole or that he must work for a living. That does not matter.

All that matters is that one has the ability to think and decipher and analyze.

Plenty of assholes work and plenty of assholes are on some dole. Assholes everywhere. Tons of 'em everywhere.

A thinking person is somewhat rare. Rare even on this forum, God knows.

I don't give a fuck how he makes his living.

Faizi

avidaloca
Posts: 231
Joined: Wed Dec 26, 2001 6:24 pm
Contact:

Post by avidaloca » Sun Sep 11, 2005 4:41 am

I don't give a fuck how he makes his living.
Neither do I. I just found it ironic that Diebert van Rhijn was talking about special government benefits for philosophers as a fantasy when it is actually a reality for the moderator of this very forum.
But I reckon the dole is not that different from a job.
These days it isn't that different, because the requirements are similar to a job, and there is forced work for free (work for the dole) after six months on it.

But David isn't on the dole, he's on a pension. He has no requirements and gets more money. It's the best arrangement you could imagine because he's not even ill but gets treated like he is. I remember faking illness as a kid once or twice and liking the special treatment - well he gets that every day.

User avatar
Diebert van Rhijn
Posts: 6469
Joined: Fri Jun 03, 2005 4:43 pm

Post by Diebert van Rhijn » Sun Sep 11, 2005 9:26 am

While philosophers might have supported the formation of a State in earlier times as rational means to support education and law, these modern times are quite different, since the masses and their mass consumption and small beliefs are what rules the State. Now, a philosopher has to be anti-state as he is anti-sheeple; it's just the nature of the beast. The State, she would silence him, unless he's being ignored already, or actually being a sheep in predator skin.

MKFaizi

Post by MKFaizi » Sun Sep 11, 2005 2:35 pm

Good for David Quinn if he can get a government pension and not have to do anything in return.

He could not pull that off in the US so he is fortunate that he lives in Australia. If I tried to say, for instance, that I am mentally unfit for work, I would be placed in an adult home with a lot of real looneys and I would be given a lot of medication that would really fuck me up.

But good for him if he can pull it off in his country and dedicate all his waking hours to the study of philosophy.

In the US, the federal government cannot even respond effectually to a disaster, let alone fund philosophy. Pathetic.

The bright side is that Bush is greatly down in the polls. I spoke to a hard core Bushie the other day. I said, "So, who do you think will make a good president next time? Jeb Bush?"

He said, "I think we have had enough of Bush's for a while."

I said, "So, who? Who is the next great conservative hope? Guilliani?"

"Well, he is a social liberal."

"Then, who?"

He said, "I have not had time to look to see what anyone is doing."

Bullshit. I listen to the same paranoic conservative radio stations as he.

"What about McCain? McCain is a republican."

He shuddered.

I said, "Well, I am just eager to flush the last eight years down the toilet."

One woman said, "I would have voted for Kerry had he not flip flopped so much."

I said, "But Bush was the ultimate flipper. He flipped from Ossama to Saddam. He said there were WMDs in Iraq and that was a flop."

I mean, damn.

Then, one woman in the office became very offended and said that she is a Republican and as such she resents the discussion.

What crap. I am registered as a Democrat. I thought Clinton sucked but he does look good compared to the current asshole. I voted for Jimmy Carter but he was not a good president. I mean, we all have to eat cake once in a while.

Let the Bushies eat cake. Let all the neo-cons eat cake.

Democracy is coming to the USA.

Faizi

User avatar
David Quinn
Posts: 5708
Joined: Sun Sep 09, 2001 6:56 am
Location: Australia
Contact:

Post by David Quinn » Sun Sep 11, 2005 3:16 pm

The last I heard, Leo Bartoli was on a similar pension to mine in the US (Vermont) - the only difference being that he receives twice as much money.

-

MKFaizi

Post by MKFaizi » Sun Sep 11, 2005 3:29 pm

Good for Leo, if that is true.

I kind of doubt the veracity of that. The last the he was posting here, he was struggling pretty hard and having to post from cafes.

Of course, he always squawked about back pain. He may have a pension but, given the scrutiny put on him, I have no envy of him. I would rather work than to go through that crap. He must be so tied up with doctors and dependent on them for pain meds.

I would rather work than to depend on doctors to write pain meds for me.

But, if he is happy, good for him. I know that he has wanted a pension for years.

Nevertheless, I do know that it is not easy to get such a pension in the US.

Faizi

User avatar
David Quinn
Posts: 5708
Joined: Sun Sep 09, 2001 6:56 am
Location: Australia
Contact:

Post by David Quinn » Sun Sep 11, 2005 5:36 pm

That you don't want to go on a pension is your choice. I was simply pointing out that you cannot blame the fact that you are living in the US for not being on one.

-

User avatar
Blair
Posts: 1527
Joined: Wed Jul 13, 2005 2:47 pm

Post by Blair » Sun Sep 11, 2005 6:15 pm

Faizi you don't know jack. You are just spouting a load of indignant crap about how this happened in "your back-yard".

Why does it matter? There are far too many people on the planet as it is.

Only an ignoramus would get so passioned about such an event of "loss of life". The world is doomed anyway. A few thousand Americans or Asians dying in the mean time is just biding time.

MKFaizi

Post by MKFaizi » Tue Sep 13, 2005 9:54 am

Well, I honestly was not blaming the fact that I live in the US for my not having a pension. I do know for a fact that getting a pension -- usually disability -- is not an easy thing to get in the US.

Leo had a bad back and was and is -- I reckon -- reliant on doctors and a lot of medication. In order to get disability, I would have to have many, many close encounters with many, many physicians. I would have to have numerous medical tests, either at my own expense or while I still had insurance. The only way I could stomach doing that would be if there was truly something very wrong with me. I don't like doctors.

Then, you have to go to court before a judge. I don't like courts and I do not like judges. Creep me out.

So, I suppose that you are right -- I COULD possibly -- just possibly -- after years and years of going to many, many doctors and going to court a few times get a disability pension -- if I could prove I had a bad back or some other malady -- like multiple sclerosis.

I have not encountered anyone in many, many years on some sort of mental illness pension who was not on horrible psychotropic medications and were diagnosed as schizophrenic and living in adult homes or pysch hospitals. I definitely don't want to go that route.

But more power to Leo if he wanted a disability pension and finally got it.

I would not want to have to do what you have to do to get it. And it is not very common in the US.

Faizi

MKFaizi

Post by MKFaizi » Tue Sep 13, 2005 9:56 am

Prince,

Cool. Perhaps, you could start some kind of suicide movement inviting people such as yourself to start eliminating yourselves for the good of the earth.

Sounds like a winner to me.

Faizi

Post Reply