the more entrenched injustices of the world...

[|read|]

...and attempting to attack their roots. Laird, you recently proposed this as a more effective use of one's time than "propagating wisdom" QRS-style (with the end result that more people simply "drop out" and cease to practically effect the world.) I completely agree.

So let's do it. Right here, right now, on this very internet forum, we shall expose the roots of the more entrenched injustices of the world. One inquiring mind at a time, we shall contribute to the eventual social revolutions that will make the world a better place. You start. :p

[daybrown]

Pardon me for jumping in since he's not had time yet to post. When we look at hominid history, the thing about these 'entrenched injustices' is that they are all systems of alpha males. There are a few examples, such as queens Victoria or Eliazbeth, or empress Catherine, that had a woman at the apex, but the rest of the entrenched injustice system was all alpha male.

There are a few obscure examples where the economic, military, & religious system empowered women. In them we see a kind of eugenics program in which the sperm donors were selected more on the basis of craftsmanship, artistry, and innovation, and where the airheads were managed with herbal birth control.

But where they failed, and why they are obscure, is that their numbers were never very many; the smart women simply didnt bear enough kids, and their cultures were eventually over run by hordes of warriors.

Course now, after thousands of years, the brave heart, strong right arm, sword in hand- no longer cuts it. And largely going on under the radar, the offices of the entrenched injustice systems are being taken over by women. Prolly sooner than is generally realized, they will use modern communications to reach consensus on what to do, among which is radically redefine what we think is justice.

[|read|]

"There are a few obscure examples where the economic, military, & religious system empowered women."

Where? When?

"And largely going on under the radar, the offices of the entrenched injustice systems are being taken over by women."

Really? How do you know?

I'm not cross-examining you, I'm just curious.

[Carl G]

When we look beyond the early oats and wheat (never corn) farming communities of 78 - 96 individuals we find that these 'entrenched injustices' are all systems of extraterrestrials lording it over the easy going ("whassup") male hominid. There are a few examples, such as the fag queens who shop at Victoria's Secret, who like it up the anus, but the rest of the entrenched injustice system was all about aliens 'fucking' the run of the mill hetero white boy.

There are many obscene examples where the economic, military, & religious system actually empowers these extraterrestrials. In them we see a kind of inter-species breeding program in which sperm donors are selected on the basis of emotional pliability and certain physical properties pleasing to these invaders from other planets.

They didn't fail to populate, to a large extent, the Earth. Why this info is obscure is that the aliens can shape-shift to look like us, or inter-dimensionally cloak themselves and their ships. Dumb women simply simply bore their kids, and thus our culture is now overrun by hordes of half-human slaves, known as Ralpha Males.

Of course martial arts are no match for them. Anyway, after thousands of years a brave heart, sword in hand, can no longer cut off a strong right arm. I'm not sure about a left arm. I'm also not sure how this relates to the topic but hey, reminds me of the good old days.

But one can still avoid traffic radar and thus the offices of the entrenched injustice systems, which by the way are being taken over by women. Yes, basically the aliens are sick of the declining economic output of the fucking couch potato Ralpha male slave legions and are turning everything over to the dumb women, and evacuating the planet. Prolly sooner than is generally realized, women will use modern communications to reach consensus on what to do, among which is radically redefine what we think is justice.

Gulp.

[Laird]

So let's do it. Right here, right now, on this very internet forum, we shall expose the roots of the more entrenched injustices of the world. One inquiring mind at a time, we shall contribute to the eventual social revolutions that will make the world a better place. You start. :p

Dude. Finally, someone proposes a relevant discussion on GF. What can I say? I'm impressed. OK, let's get into it then.

What I see as the most entrenched injustice in the world is the disparity between the first and the third worlds, and the fact that our largely free market global economy rewards practices which exploit that disparity. For example, large multinational companies can save lots of money by out-sourcing labour to cheap countries. There is a definite gain for the first-world: it ends up with vastly cheaper goods. But the first world is the least in need of gain: it is already rich compared to the country that it is exploiting. Some people argue that there is a gain for the third world country in that it gains a source of employment and income that it wouldn't already have. This is a fair enough argument, but the point remains that the country - and its workers - is being blatantly exploited - the wages that its workers are paid in this process are vastly inferior to those that first-world workers would be paid and the irony is that, being a poor country, quite the reverse should be the case - this country is more in need of remuneration than a first-world country.

Now I'm no economist. Perhaps there are free-market economists who would argue that this "exploitation" is simply a necessary part of the process of enriching all nations - that the capital that flows into the country by virtue of it being the poorest and hence most exploitable country will allow it to develop and catch up to the exploiting nations. Perhaps our hypothetical economist would argue that yes, the current disparities are deplorable, but just let the free market run its course and eventually those disparities will even themselves out, and that the growing wealth of countries like India and China is evidence that this is already happening. Personally I would be somewhat skeptical of this prognosis, but as I said, I'm no economist and for all I know it is right. Even granting the truth of such a prognosis, though, there is nothing to stop us from fast-tracking the process, and indeed, I would argue that it is incumbent upon we in the privileged first world to do all that we can to lift up out of poverty those in the developing world.

I guess that if I really wanted to propose the most effective means of righting the imbalance I would need to study economics quite thoroughly. With the qualification then that I am not really qualified to comment, I would like anyway to suggest that the free market is probably too free, that it rewards inequitable behaviour, and that what we require is a global legislature that regulates the global economy such that the poor, rather than being exploited, are rewarded. I could of course be wrong that this is the right approach, but at the very least what I would like to see is a prohibition against sweat-shop labour.

I hope that Sapius sees fit to pass comment on this thread when he returns from his trip because as I understand it he devotes his life to assisting the poverty-stricken. Edit: in fact I've gone so far as to send him a PM requesting his participation in this thread.

[Shahrazad]

In my view, the greatest injustices of the world are slavery and imperialism. A communist man that I knew personally and is now dead, considers that these two are really one and the same thing -- the only difference is the level at which they are applied. We call it slavery when it occurs at the individual level, and imperialism when what is being enslaved is a whole nation / country. I believe they are the cause of most of the armed conflict going on in the world right now.

-

[Shahrazad]

I could of course be wrong that this is the right approach, but at the very least what I would like to see is a prohibition against sweat-shop labour.

I would second that motion.

I hope that Sapius sees fit to pass comment on this thread when he returns from his trip because as I understand it he devotes his life to assisting the poverty-stricken.

Impressive.

-

[Unidian]

Sorry to poop the party a bit, but I think the premise that the injustices in question are "entrenched" is inconsistent with the premise that we can make any immediate progress on them through this sort of discussion. If an injustice is truly entrenched, then it is one that has seeped deeply into the culture and cannot be exposed without most likely encountering opposition from almost everyone, possibly including those suggesting the discussion.

Over the years, I've attempted to expose what I perceive to be some injustices which are very deeply entrenched, and I've learned through hard experience that sometimes we have to pick our battles and our venues very carefully. One can't go around exposing the most deeply entrenched injustices willy-nilly. They are liable to get run out on a rail and lynched.

[Nick Treklis]

The root of the problem is that the vast majority people pursue a life that is emotionally satisfying as opposed to a life dedicated to uncovering Truth. Truth is emotionally painful for people because it starts off exposing one's own insanity as well as their closest of kin. People erect mental-blocks to protect and ensure their egos that everything is fine and dandy allowing their emotional state to remain generally positive. Knowing the Truth is a huge responsibility that requires brutal self honesty that is quite simply too much for most to bear. People would rather just be happy, no matter the consequences.

[Elizabeth Isabelle]

Prolly sooner than is generally realized, women will use modern communications to reach consensus on what to do, among which is radically redefine what we think is justice.

We can only hope so. Do you actually think that the current "justice" system is actually solving the crime problem? Just the other day I saw a notice taped to the checkout counter at a bookstore stating that they no longer sent deliveries to the local jail. I asked why, and the cashier said that the guard is appropriating packages being sent to prisoners and keeping them for himself, so the books don't get to their intended recipient.

It is even commonly acknowledged that the current prison system is most likely to cause the inmates to come out with better crime skills and more criminal contacts, and does not tend to reform criminals into good citizens.

Advances in DNA research have proven the innocence of countless convicted felons. How many others have wrongly been found guilty? How many previously innocent people turned to a life of crime after being wrongly convicted, and then having that record which prevented them from so many honest lines of work? This is not justice being served, but it is the system that men came up with.

[Unidian]

So you think that women can somehow come up with a better justice system? I'm skeptical of that, and I think this is yet another area where the gender issue is nearly irrelevant. I think the justice system is going to continue to suck in many ways until the faith-based beliefs that inform it are undermined. The biggest of these is "free will." More injustice of every variety is committed due to the consequences of this belief than perhaps any other.

Free will is closely related to the dualistic concept of a supernatural self. Undermining either of these closely-related faith-based beliefs will help pave the way for a better system of criminal (and economic and social) justice. Band-aid solutions and incremental improvements are better than nothing, but if sweeping change is what we really want, then it has to start at the level of our own beliefs and values.

[Carl G]

I think the justice system is thoroughly corrupt, and that women will have little to no effect on that.

[Elizabeth Isabelle]

and I think this is yet another area where the gender issue is nearly irrelevant.

Agreed. I was going to take a break off this board for awhile as I recognized that all the chauvinism and misogyny was making me prone to some reactionary feminism - but I heard about this good thread and came back.

Keep flagging things when I need it Nat - sometimes the battle-weary see through blood-covered glasses.

So you think that women can somehow come up with a better justice system?

Well, as is frequently pointed out, I'm a woman - and here's a summary of my idea (wrote a longer, more complete version - but cut and pasted it over to the book):

Treat "criminals" as if they are children who merely did not get raised completely, and give them what they need to be productive citizens. A benevolent system would be much more efficient and effective as resources are directed at solving the problem (need of meds, counseling, training, or for a very few, long-term constructive supervision) because people would seek the help they or their loved ones need rather than try to duck out on a system they perceive will make their lives worse.

All people do what they do because it seemed like a good idea at the moment they did it (even Hitler meant well, he was just really wrong about some stuff). If we approach from compassion, then people will be motivated to tell the truth. If the truth is easily accessible, then the solution is more obvious, resources are not wasted, and no one is wrongly punished.

As for accessible truth - if a system is benevolent, there will be no more "getting off on a technicality" or built-in ways to escape justice like certain key people not having to testify. No more lawyers looking for loopholes to get their client off, or such an adversarial system where the lawyers have a personal stake in whether "they" win or lose. It is only truth that wins or loses.

[daybrown]

"There are a few obscure examples where the economic, military, & religious system empowered women."
Where? When?
"And largely going on under the radar, the offices of the entrenched injustice systems are being taken over by women."
Really? How do you know?
I'm not cross-examining you, I'm just curious.

It is obscure. The Mosou of SW China may be a remnant, way the fuck up in the SE Himalayas. But elsewhere in the Himalayas anthropologists have documented hill tribes that hand down property in the female line. A new heir will take a few husbands to start out with, and then if the resource base supports it, take on a co-wife, for what we'd call polyamourus, or a 'polypod'.

This wasnt invented in the Himalayas, but brought in by women from Silk Road towns like Khotan & Kucha fleeing the Mongol hordes who swept all the way West across Asia. It is Kucha which is the best documented, altho there are samples from Urumchi, Niya, Loulan, Khotan, and other independent city states that existed beyond the hegemony of Chinese, Persian, Roman, & Byzantine empires.

You know how the "Magi came from the East"? If you read ancient Chinese texts, they say their magicians, the "ma-ag" came from the West. Kucha is "that east" or "west" as the case may be. A city about the size of Athens, but it flowered for a thousand years, not just a few hundred.

I have a copy of the "Maitreyasamiti Texts in Tocharian A", which were found behind a false wall by Taoist monks in recent times cleaning out a Buddhist temple. The copy was made in the 5th century, and part of an entire library of hundreds of ancient scrolls. This is real Indiana Jones country.

Anyway, the text is a conversation between the living Buddha and the Gautamid queen of Kucha. Had Kucha had a king, he wouldda been talking to *him*. And unlike other sacred texts where we see the alpha male leader handing down the law, here the dialogue is about the appropriate way she should perform what we now know are original Aryan rituals. This is NW China now, but back then, it was mostly white people. Speaking a language that is closer to the original Proto-Indo-European than anything found since. Dna from the grave yards is still found among the Slavs.

"The Tarim Mummies" by Muir and Mallory, or "the Mummies of Urumchi" by archeo fabrics expert Barber prove the connection with Europe. We call the language "Tocharian" cause "to" is "the" in greek, and these are the "Carians" mentioned in Greek sources, known to be the cousins of the Celts. Who were even buried with fabric woven in classic Tartan.

This is real spooky shit. They found a buried female tribal leader. a 'raj', in a casket made an extra couple feet long so she could wear her tall, black, conical, flat brimmed hat. That'd pass in any halloween costume. A "raj", is a "witch". And there really was a wicked witch of "The East".

Kucha was a real popular place. The brothels were run by the witches, and owned by the queen. Since the queen didnt need a harem, she didnt need a palace to keep them in, nor a castle to protect the palace. Nor did she need to tax the shit out of everyone to pay for it.

There are no slums at Kucha. They didnt breed airheads, but drafted them into brothels. The Kuchi were also notorious for wearing silk. And when the Kuchi coo by the brothel door, the men come running. And when they leave, they pay with the curious perforated Kuchan coin (like washers), known as "cash". The women also wore cash laced together, which is still seen on women in central asia.

Belly dancers wear a form of this cash/lace around the waist which is designed to rattle as they wriggle their hips. It is known as a "Kucha belt". In India, the Goddess Kali wears the same thing. And only a Kucha belt. no undies. topless. Since men were banned from positions of authority, in India, the Priesthood of Kali is all transvestites.

The ancestral cousins of the Carians, the Scythians, were known for the same thing. Their men developed a potion made of pregnant mare's piss that was so high in estrogen their beards fell out and they few what the fags now call "puppy tits". They would not have bothered doing that if men were permitted to be in positions of power.

There were two factors that empowered women besides sex in the ages before STDs. The first domestic horses, in Ukraine 6000 years ago, were little more than ponies that warriors were too heavy to ride. JP Mallory, "In Search of the Indo-Europeans" shows the result, an Amazon on the cover of his book. Seen at http://daybrown.org/artifax/artifax.html (give it a minute to load, there's lots jpgs). Light framed Cucuteni women could ride faster than warriors could run. And they swept across the Steppes, making it to what is now NW China 4000 years ago.

But there, in the Taklamakhan desert, it was easy for them to poison the few waterholes when armies came. So they didnt need their own army, didnt need the warrior class to protect them. The desert did that. The name "taklamakhan" in Chinese means:"go in, do not come back out". The road to Kucha was well known because it was so clearly marked out by the skeletons of the dead along the way.

You dont go there if you dont know what you are doing. But eventually, there was a real wet year, all the dry valleys were full of water, and the Mongols swept in. Still, even today, if you go to Urumchi or Kucha you will see green eyed fair skinned women who would pass unnoticed on any European street. Yet- speak Chinese like a Native, which they are.

[Dan Rowden]

It is obscure. The Mosou of SW China may be a remnant, way the fuck up in the SE Himalayas. But elsewhere in the Himalayas anthropologists have documented hill tribes that hand down property in the female line.

This is what happens to cultures permanently deprived of oxygen.

[brokenhead]

When we look beyond the early oats and wheat (never corn) farming communities of 78 - 96 individuals we find that these 'entrenched injustices' are all systems of extraterrestrials lording it over the easy going ("whassup") male hominid. There are a few examples, such as the fag queens who shop at Victoria's Secret, who like it up the anus, but the rest of the entrenched injustice system was all about aliens 'fucking' the run of the mill hetero white boy.

There are many obscene examples where the economic, military, & religious system actually empowers these extraterrestrials. In them we see a kind of inter-species breeding program in which sperm donors are selected on the basis of emotional pliability and certain physical properties pleasing to these invaders from other planets.

They didn't fail to populate, to a large extent, the Earth. Why this info is obscure is that the aliens can shape-shift to look like us, or inter-dimensionally cloak themselves and their ships. Dumb women simply simply bore their kids, and thus our culture is now overrun by hordes of half-human slaves, known as Ralpha Males.

Of course martial arts are no match for them. Anyway, after thousands of years a brave heart, sword in hand, can no longer cut off a strong right arm. I'm not sure about a left arm. I'm also not sure how this relates to the topic but hey, reminds me of the good old days.

But one can still avoid traffic radar and thus the offices of the entrenched injustice systems, which by the way are being taken over by women. Yes, basically the aliens are sick of the declining economic output of the fucking couch potato Ralpha male slave legions and are turning everything over to the dumb women, and evacuating the planet. Prolly sooner than is generally realized, women will use modern communications to reach consensus on what to do, among which is radically redefine what we think is justice.

Gulp.

rotfl No one is forcing you to read daybrown's posts!

[Laird]

Sorry to poop the party a bit, but I think the premise that the injustices in question are "entrenched" is inconsistent with the premise that we can make any immediate progress on them through this sort of discussion. If an injustice is truly entrenched, then it is one that has seeped deeply into the culture and cannot be exposed without most likely encountering opposition from almost everyone, possibly including those suggesting the discussion.

But "entrenched" needn't mean "invisible" nor that people are generally incognisant of it, it might simply be that it's a particularly difficult problem to solve. That's the sense that I intended it in anyway.

Over the years, I've attempted to expose what I perceive to be some injustices which are very deeply entrenched, and I've learned through hard experience that sometimes we have to pick our battles and our venues very carefully. One can't go around exposing the most deeply entrenched injustices willy-nilly. They are liable to get run out on a rail and lynched.

[disappointedly packing away my noose] Come on Nat, don't hold out on us, man! I know that you have tonnes to contribute on this topic, because you've shared some of your views with me in chat in the past. I was disappointed that your post had so little substance to it - substance in the sense of the stated purpose of the thread of actually getting down into the nuts and bolts of the problems. Go on, pick your favourite(s) and have at it!

[Unidian]

Well, I did that some time ago, and I got the shit kicked out of me verbally (although not intellectually). I'm sure you recall the topic. It had hundreds of posts, many consisting of nothing but vicious and gratitous personal abuse against me.

And why such treatment, you may wonder? For the reason I suggested above. The particular injustice I highlighted is one that is very deeply entrenched - to the point that it isn't even recognized as an injustice by most people, and is promoted as virtuous instead. That's what happens when injustices become "entrenched" in the most meaningful sense.

[Laird]

OK, I'll let you off the hook then owing to prior contributions.

[Sue Hindmarsh]

Nick wrote:

The root of the problem is that the vast majority people pursue a life that is emotionally satisfying as opposed to a life dedicated to uncovering Truth.

People would rather just be happy, no matter the consequences.

Yes, the desire for emotional happiness is the cause of all the injustices in the world. To end its reign it has to be pulled out by the roots using the tools of reason and logic. Once love, kindness and compassion are exposed to rationality, all violence and tyranny, greed and exploitation, hatred and injustice completely fall away.

[Sue Hindmarsh]

|read|wrote:

...and attempting to attack their roots. Laird, you recently proposed this as a more effective use of one's time than "propagating wisdom" QRS-style (with the end result that more people simply "drop out" and cease to practically effect the world.) I completely agree.

What are you on about?

So let's do it. Right here, right now, on this very internet forum, we shall expose the roots of the more entrenched injustices of the world. One inquiring mind at a time, we shall contribute to the eventual social revolutions that will make the world a better place. You start. :p

In my post above, I write about how the attachment to love and compassion are direct causes of hate and intolerance. Most people are thoroughly addicted to the emotional highs of the love drug. And like all drug addicts, they can’t see the total wreck they make of their own lives and the lives of those around them. The fact that there are billions of love-addicts accounts for the poor state of the world. Well, 6,602,224,000 addicts, completely off their heads, running riot over the world could do little more than cause havoc!

[brokenhead]

Yes, the desire for emotional happiness is the cause of all the injustices in the world. To end its reign it has to be pulled out by the roots using the tools of reason and logic. Once love, kindness and compassion are exposed to rationality, all violence and tyranny, greed and exploitation, hatred and injustice completely fall away.

How simply marvelous.

You are a crackpot of the first order.

I don't even think you believe this. Why you spout it is beyond me. I am starting to believe that you might even be dangerous.

[DHodges]

And why such treatment, you may wonder? For the reason I suggested above. The particular injustice I highlighted is one that is very deeply entrenched - to the point that it isn't even recognized as an injustice by most people, and is promoted as virtuous instead. That's what happens when injustices become "entrenched" in the most meaningful sense.

That deeply entrenched injustice was that other people weren't being forced to work to support you, right?

[Unidian]

EDIT: On second thought, I'm not gonna do it. I can see absolutely no positive outcome in responding to this. If that's what you insist on believing it's all about, then suit yourself.

[DHodges]

That's pretty much all I got out of it, yeah.