Jesuits: shows how they went to great lengths to spread the Gospel (ever tried climbing waterfalls barefooted and living
-
Eumenides_0 — 13 years ago(June 06, 2012 09:53 AM)
Anyone who thinks "what was wrong with YOUR culture and YOUR customs" (I assume it's yours for simplicity) should look at things like "witchcraft trials" (general female opression) in Christian countries (the whole heresy laws) and ask that question again.
Why should we ask those questions again? Witchcraft trials no longer exist in the West: today we know people who claim to be possessed by the devil suffer from mental illnesses, so we take care of them instead. And women's right and role in society have come a long way since medieval times. The West doesn't have a brilliant track record, but it has changed, and it's disingenuous to pretend it hasn't. The Holy Church no longer dominates every aspect of existence the way it did, people are free not to believe in God, they're free to parody Jesus Christ, if they want. Scientists, historians and archeologists are free to put in question the Bible. Oh, we've come a long way for sure.
I wonder, can a person doubt Koran in Iran? Can a person there say that Mohammed never existed?
Obviously in the West we have a short-memory span problem and we tend to forget tiny details like the fact our civilization was responsible for more war, organized massacres and oppression than all the other civilizations in the world combined, and for a longer period of time (that is why we are lying "ahead" of other civilizations, hey death rules!!!);
Well, I'm glad the West has managed to develop the technology to not only stop others from conquering it, but also managed to export its culture to other countries. Would Europe be better if the Persians had conquered it in the 5th century BC, or if the Arabs had conquered it in the 8th century AD? If other countries didn't want to be invaded, perhaps they should have been as strong as the West was in defeating its invaders.
And in spite of all the West's hegemony, voices of dissent have always criticised its crimes, voices usually from within its civilisation, demonstrating that the West's ability for destruction is second only to its ability for self-criticism and freedom of tought. The West has had many tyrants, but also many martyrs and heroes who exposed the tyrants' crimes. Now I wonder, where are the voices of dissent within fundamentalist Islam?
That is until the Chinese and Indians take over obviously, as they shall eventually.
It's frightening to imagine that anyone could be happy with China ever imposing its vicious culture and social politics upon the world. I don't see how people have grown to be so hateful of freedom and civilisation, to want the world to devolve. Of course if you're anxious to live in a dictatorship, why don't you live there? After all, if you're using the internet, I presume you're living in a democratic country where people have free access to the internet.
This world is a comedy to those that think, a tragedy to those that feel. -
Professicchio — 13 years ago(June 06, 2012 05:35 PM)
Why should we ask those questions again? Witchcraft trials no longer exist in the West..
Well, no sh*t Sherlock, congratulations on your
acumen
!
The point I was trying to make is that since we descend exactly from these sort of people that saw nothing wrong in commiting these atrocities we cannot claim any moral high ground: is the circmstances thate create the monsters not the other way round, beneath it all we are all exactly the same human beings.
The reason why we have come on "top" of the other civilizations is in direct relation to the amount of troubles we have caused and we have been through in the past: it's not that we have civilised ourselves
DESPITE
what we have caused, but is what we have caused in the past that
HAS CREATED
what we are now as civilization, for the good or the bad!
Unfortunately there's no simpler way to explain you but to give you this (oversimplifying but fitting) comparison: the west, particularly after the last two world wars fiasco
(let's remind ourselves briefly what was that about. oh yes! Around 70 millions people massacred exclusively by the hands of westerners, exception made in the case of Japan which, funny enough, it's now in the "big civilized club", not by any coincidence mind you)
has developed a gigantic "guilty conscience" complex about it's own past and has spent the last century making up for it but at the same time being in a position to put these beliefs in practice by the force of being in a much more favourable economic position created, the irony of it all, by the new bonds between powerful nations that the post-war has created, funny enough.
Can I give you another extremely simple, moron-proof, term of comparison?
Here it is:
Christianity: nearly 20 centuries old.
Islam: nearly 14 centuries old.
If I remember correctly our dear ancestors around 600 years ago were well busy burning people on stakes, especially women, while they had not yet even started to create havoc in the yet-to-be-discovered American continent, as they indeed did in the next few centuries, massacrating the locals while importing hundreds of thousands of African slaves (a good majority of them actually didn't even make it to the continent thanks to the humane treatment on those ships).
If our civilization had to go through that before developing a conscience don't you think it's a bit unfair to expect all the others to just "grow up" in one go without a decent and fair amount of invasions, massacres and rapes to commit first?
Isn't a bit unfair that should always be the whites to get to have all the fun? We get to exterminate 6 million jews in just over a couple of years and (absolute record courtesy of the mighty US) annihilate 70,000 innocent civilians in a fraction of a second in the Hiroshima bombing (those who survived got it much worse actually) and them?.. what, 9/11? Are you kidding me?! That wasn't even the equivalent of a pinch on the bottom.
Sorry to be so dark my friend but that's exactly as it is.
Now I wonder, where are the voices of dissent within fundamentalist Islam?
They are there pal, and they were well loud in the last Iranian elections fiasco for example, but you have to have patience, read again what I said above and remember it's the year 1433 in the Islamic world not the year 2012!
If you expect a 10 year old to have the same degree of maturity of an 18 year old you have a lot of growing up to do yourself I'm afraid to tell you.
It's frightening to imagine that anyone could be happy with China ever imposing its vicious culture and social politics upon the world. I don't see how people have grown to be so hateful of freedom and civilisation
You see the problem with China, India or all the other emerging powers is not actually at all a problem
with
China etc., the problem is with us!
You see while we are here discussing and generally wasting our time we have developed the unhealthy habit to give financiers, lawyers, politicians and all sort of high-flying parasites the liberty to control our own lives to a degree it wasn't possible before, despite the fact we are still kept under the illusion of "freedom"; meanwhile the Chinese and others have developed a very unhealthy (for us that is) habit to work their asses off, studying unbelievably hard and grabbing any opportunity they can to improve themself and buy all the knowledge they can from the west, as well as real economical assets; so don't be surprised if that's the way it goes, the world is just a sphere: what goes around comes around.
But of course there is always the old western ways to get back into in case we'll really can't take it anymore in the close future: which is causing havoc and war on a global level, but that trick, I'm afraid, the others might have just caught up already -
Eumenides_0 — 13 years ago(June 07, 2012 12:07 PM)
Well, I daresay you're wrong on many counts. First of all, it's not true that our ancestors "saw nothing wrong in commiting these atrocities." Western philosophy, politics and thinking is full of voices of dissent that criticised their own societies and cultures. Yes, it's true the Church oppressed women, but the West also developed female emancipation. Yes, the West traded in slavery - but remarkably less than the Arabs did - but it also passed laws to abolish it as early as the 1800s (by opposition, slavery was still practiced in Africa by Arab traders as late as the 1960s). Yes, the West used to have cruel laws, but excepting the USA, most countries have stopped using the death penality, whereas Sharia Law still considers stoning and amputation proper punishments. Yes, the West discriminated homosexuals, but now it allows gay marriage and gay adoption, whereas in some Asian countries being gay is still a crime. Yes, the West had great wars, but also diplomats and conscientious objectors and peace activists who suffered greatly for their convictions. The West enslaved other cultures, but also showed a great interest in their culture - a case in point, after the Muslims nearly destroyed the indigenous Indian culture after centuries of occupation, it was the British who started projects of discovery and rehabilitation of India's history, temples, monuments and language: this isn't known because it doesn't conform with the current portrait of the West as a monolithic racist culture. The West has committed attrocities but it has also been critical of itself - only a man who is so ignorant of Espinoza, Erasmus, Kant, Locke, Bertrand Russell and countless other great thinkers would be blind to that.
As for the West coming on top of other cultures, do you think no one has ever tried to invade the Europe? Have you never heard of the Persian invasions, fended off by the Greeks? of the Arab occupation of the Iberian peninsula for centuries? Of Ganghis Khan? I don't dispute that the West has benefitted from colonialism, but what gave the West the superiority to conquer them and not the opposite? At some point in history, civilisations must have been on a technologically equal standing - what changed? Why did Africa and Asia become more vulnerable to Europe and not otherwise? Perhaps the culture in Europe promoted technological development, whereas other countries stagnated. Colonialism is an outcome of technological and economic superiority, not an explanation of it.
As for Hiroshima and Nagasaki, although I'm not American, I fully agree with the necessity of bombing them. Japan's culture was highly nationalistic and its people wasn't going to surrender. They would have likely fought to the last man even though they were fighting for a crminal cause. The USA's alternative would have been to send soldiers to invade the island, resulting not only in thousands of casualties but also prolonging the war. I doubt Truman's was taken lightly, but it was possibly the best alternative. I'm more trouble about the needless bombing of Dresden, really, which just the Allies showing off to the Russians their military power.
Regarding the guilty conscience, I don't think the West has it, not really - only a small subset of academics who read too much Edward Said and his promoters of Westen hatred. Sadly some teachers in the West have absorbed that doctrine of hatred and continue to pass it on to new generations of susceptible students. Fortunately, there are also many academics fighting that doctrine of hatred: Roger Kimball, Ibn Warraq, Keith Windschuttle, Mary Midgley, to name a few. I hope sanity will win in the end.
If you expect a 10 year old to have the same degree of maturity of an 18 year old you have a lot of growing up to do yourself I'm afraid to tell you.
This is so hilariously racist, I barely know what to write. So your defense of Islam and the Arab world is to declare that they're basically like children. That's funny because that was also an argument used by colonials to justify enslaving other cultures. But now instead of bringing civilization to them to help them grow up, we should leave them alone because they're not big enough to share the dinner table with the adults.
meanwhile the Chinese and others have developed a very unhealthy (for us that is) habit to work their asses off, studying unbelievably hard and grabbing any opportunity they can to improve themself and buy all the knowledge they can from the west, as well as real economical assets; so don't be surprised if that's the way it goes, the world is just a sphere: what goes around comes around.
So your ideal society is composed of working ants? That's sad. I prefer a culture that develops art, writes novels and plays, makes movies, reflects about ideas. The Chinese are good at learning and manufacturing, provided they have the instructions, but not at creating new ideas. Genuine innovation continues to come from the West. The Chinese just build things. A -
Professicchio — 13 years ago(June 08, 2012 06:25 PM)
Thanks for your enlighted account on the Western civilization my friend, I definitely needed that, I admit I have no idea how I could have lived up to this point without it!
Sarcasm aside through those mostly correct, though generic and utterly pointless, information I can assume you have been at least through few years of high school and are not a complete moron, so that's good news but you have still entirely missed the point: I don't give a rat's arse if or what or when these past event involving the West where justified or not, the point is they have created the modern civilization as we know it, while the different turn of events has shaped the other civilizations likewise, these are not just tiny details that can be put aside and dismissed at convenience!
I knew that my point on "guilty conscience" was way to abstract for you to understand so nevermind that, but, please, go shove those academics where the sun don't shine while you're at it, never read them or gave a hint of a toss about them.
I was not making any children/adults parallel in relation to physical HUMANS but to CIVILIZATIONS, it's a totally different thing; is it in any way racist to say that between two different human beings of different upbringing but equal intelligence and dignity, the one who has gone through the toughest and wider experiences in life is the most likely to succeed on different levels of confrontation? But you know what I find disturbing on your part? You seem to think that voices of dissent only exist within those examples that you are making, while other cultures are somewhat "retarded".
Again, how long did it it took for the West to create a proper voice of dissent against the egemonic Christian rule? Wasn't it a bit longer than 14 centuries? When where all those "dissenters" you have mentioned born?
Still a bit oversimplifying but I rest my case, shut up and let's talk about that again in 200 years.
Your counter-argument his (not very) hilariously racist my friend: and it is in the sense that you seem truly to think that these other civilizations had nothing or little to offer to us when infact they provided a colossal contribution to what we are now, even though in the turn of events there came the invitable near-grinding halt at a certain point of history.
At the time between the end of the Roman Empire and the Renaissance, the so called "dark ages" (it was actuall "dark" only for us the west, let's be clear about that for once), the Arabs produced possibly the most vibrant civilization around earth for at least 4 centuries, and it was thanks to them that many lessons from the the ancient Greeks, Egyptians and others were developed and have not been completely lost. If you had the patience
So your ideal society is composed of working ants? That's sad. I prefer a culture that develops art, writes novels and plays, makes movies, reflects about ideas. The Chinese are good at learning and manufacturing,.
Double racism with a whammy, congratulations (and there's more to come)!!! So that's your idea of the Chinese as it turns out, did you just say "working ants"?
Just because of you are unable to see past the 'socialist state' and all that crap you think that's all 1.3 and growing billion people got to offer? That the current state of the affairs cannot be a platform for better things to come just like the dark ages was for us (funny enough back then it was the Chinese and the Arabs that played the role of the "west" somewhat, the world is just a big sphere indeed).
Can I just remind you that China has been printing books (not to mention printing banknotes, ironically enough), using highly advanced medicine, mathematics and philosophy, hundreds of years ahead of the west in many cases.
So you have never come across a great contemporary Chinese work of art, a film or a manufact? I feel pretty sorry for you!
But I agree there are probably not too many around as they could and, inevitably, WILL be, just wait and see, if patience is your forte.
You don't see that many original works around because unfortunately for hundred of millions of them at the moment the only viable option is to "replicate" what we do for a much lower cost for no much more of a reason than survival (and for our benefit, since by buying their stuff we are left with a lot more cash and time to spare so we can have the opportunity to create our arsty-fartsy stuff easier then they can) but this is only for what concerns this particular moment of history; eventually (few decades actually) a new class will rise out of that misery and they'll have plenty of time on their hands to muddle with the arts, buy gigantic villas and fast cars and you know the funny part? You still won't like them a bit, except for very different reasons that time around.
I just wonder who will be making the "toys" we are now addicted to, when that happens.
But all in all, in a nutshell, do you want to know what I find incredibly racist in your attitude? It's the fact that you ha -
Eumenides_0 — 13 years ago(June 09, 2012 04:26 PM)
I don't give a rat's arse if or what or when these past event involving the West where justified or not, the point is they have created the modern civilization as we know it, while the different turn of events has shaped the other civilizations likewise, these are not just tiny details that can be put aside and dismissed at convenience!
Our modern world is the result of several cultures interacting, peacefully or belligerently, across time and space, and not just the predatorial actions of Europe and the United States upon others. It's always important to remember people of this. After all, everyone thinks the West is to blame for everything, which is absurd. For instance, was the West's fault that in the 7th century Muslims invaded Europe, thus creating resentment against them, which in turned led to the Crusades and thousands of events that have taken us to where we are now? History is essential to understand the world.
I knew that my point on "guilty conscience" was way to abstract for you to understand so nevermind that, but, please, go shove those academics where the sun don't shine while you're at it, never read them or gave a hint of a toss about them.
So is it just my academics that I should shove where the sun doesn't shine, or academics in general? It doesn't surprise me that you don't refute my points with anything but aggressive posturing and ad hominem insults; it seems you're the one who needs a bit of culture. Don't tell me you're one of those people who was born educated?
I was not making any children/adults parallel in relation to physical HUMANS but to CIVILIZATIONS, it's a totally different thing; is it in any way racist to say that between two different human beings of different upbringing but equal intelligence and dignity, the one who has gone through the toughest and wider experiences in life is the most likely to succeed on different levels of confrontation?
The problem with your logic is that, due to your hatred of the West, you deny the possibility that Western civilization may help these civilizations improve themselves. The problem with demonizing the West and victimizing the rest is that it implies that the West can contribute with nothing of good to them, and that they don't even need to change at all. A civilization like the Muslim one would certainly benefit from many of the West's ideas on human rights, freedom and civil liberties. But since the West is utterly wicked, Islam can continue to promote evils like the Sharia law.
know what I find disturbing on your part? You seem to think that voices of dissent only exist within those examples that you are making, while other cultures are somewhat "retarded".
Not retarded - that's your word, not mine - but a culture of victimization has rendered self-criticism irrelevant. When the West can be blamed for anything, why should African countries and Islam feel the need to look into themselves for the causes of their own problems? Just compare the way Germany and Japan deal with their war crimes: Germany has done a lot to atone for the Holocaust. As far as I know Japan has never aopologized for the Rape of Nanking or the medical experiments of Unit 371. However this aggressor has managed to turn itself into a victim and every year remembers Hiroshima and Nagasaki, as if they hadn't deserved it for waging war on innocent people.
gain, how long did it it took for the West to create a proper voice of dissent against the egemonic Christian rule? Wasn't it a bit longer than 14 centuries? When where all those "dissenters" you have mentioned born?
Still a bit oversimplifying but I rest my case, shut up and let's talk about that again in 200 years.
Well, if you have read Edward Gibson's
The Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire,
you'll know that the Romans criticised Christianity long before emperor Constantine decided to turn it the Roman Empire's official religion, in the 4th century. But since you're an ahistorical people who doesn't like academics, I guess this evidence won't sway you.
Furthermore, the West's long secular tradition could easily be adopted by Islamic reformists, if they wanted. Only a culture so isolated from others would refuse to adopt ideas that already exist and may help them. Islam doesn't have to wait 1400 years, it just needs the will to change and to grow closer to the West. It's that will to change and to establish meaningful dialogues with others that I doubt exists.
At the time between the end of the Roman Empire and the Renaissance, the so called "dark ages" (it was actuall "dark" only for us the west, let's be clear about that for once), the Arabs produced possibly the most vibrant civilization around earth for at least 4 centuries, and it was thanks to them that many lessons from the the ancient Greeks, Egyptians and others were developed and have not been completely lost. If you had the patience.
The dark ages is a misconception that has been kept alive by pop culture. Incredible advances were made in these c -
Professicchio — 13 years ago(June 09, 2012 06:34 PM)
Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha you seriously are a funny guy, man!
Do you know what's funny? You are relpying to my points by almost exactly repeating what I have said to you earlier but just twisting the wording a bit, so to make it look like they are your own original points and you are still contraddicting and not actually agreeing with me. It's just the icing on the cake that you had to conclude it all by saying "
It's a matter of waiting
" which it's not monstrously different from my "
just wait and see
" earlier, a bit redundant isn't it?
Do not worry I have seen that tactic before, in other contexts it's called "climbing on the mirrors", it's just that you are taking quite an admirable effort at it. You can use your "balance" as you wish, anyone's got its own scales to measure things.
You do carry on though still giving out gratuitous and pointless bits of historical information which neither I contested nor are at all relevant to this conversation: give it up please, seriously, again, truth aside, no one is impressed here.
On the subject I am not saying that academia is entirely useless but I have been breathing, eating and drinking Roman, Greek, Arab and Phoenician history and culture from the instant I was conceived as I was born right in the middle of it and I am direct descendant of what's left of them, that is a privilege that no historian can obtain by simple eruditon, no matter how many years you may spend reading books.
By the way it's
Edward Gibbon
the name of the guy who wrote
The Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire
, not Gibson (you never know, you might want to use that information again in the future).
Apart from the that you are still coming up with the occasional cretinous assumptions like that I "
deny the possibility that Western civilization may help these civilizations improve themselves
", again this is crap that YOU are saying pal, not me, but just remember this while we are on the subject:
it works both ways in the helping department
! If you think that we only got to teach and not to learn from others regardless how "civilized" they are, wether be Chinese, Arabs or whatever, we are sure on another sure path towards BIG trouble, just sayin'.
Nevermind though you seem to be getting the point:
I hope the West will: it needs the jobs.
Nice to see how quickly you are learning to speak my language, I am not a bad teacher am I? You can never put down a good old story like that of "
The Ant and the Grasshopper
" (No need to tell who the ants are in this case do we?).
[But serioulsy that is a stupid signature phrase, I'd change it if i was you, Walpole was a great writer but not much of a philosopher, just sayin']. -
Eumenides_0 — 13 years ago(June 10, 2012 10:35 AM)
Your 'wait and see' isn't a particularly insightful statement, though, is it? It doesn't require a lot of intellect to say that we'll have to wait and see what will happen in China. Of course we will, the future can't be predicted, so we'll just have to wait for further developments.
On the subject I am not saying that academia is entirely useless but I have been breathing, eating and drinking Roman, Greek, Arab and Phoenician history and culture from the instant I was conceived as I was born right in the middle of it and I am direct descendant of what's left of them, that is a privilege that no historian can obtain by simple eruditon, no matter how many years you may spend reading books.
No, you're merely an Italian, from what I can gather from your film reviews. That hardly makes you an expert by birth on multicultarism and ancient civilizations. One learns about cultures from studying cultures, not from living in them. In fact, sometimes an emotional detachment from them actually helps to sharpen one's critical faculties. Being too involved in something makes one partial.
By the way it's Edward Gibbon the name of the guy who wrote The Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, not Gibson (you never know, you might want to use that information again in the future).
Unfortunately it seems I won't have the opportunity of correcting you; you've made it clear you're too intelligent to rely on the the books of others. Alas, I'm merely an average person who enjoys educating himself through books. I wasn't born knowing everything, so I complement that deficiency by reading them, and I've also learned to back-up arguments by referring to authorities on topics. Obviously you're your own authority.
If you think that we only got to teach and not to learn from others regardless how "civilized" they are, wether be Chinese, Arabs or whatever, we are sure on another sure path towards BIG trouble, just sayin'.
But the West has never shied away from learning from other cultures. It adopted the Phoenician alphabet, Hindu numbers, mathematical notions from Babylonia and Egypt, the aforementioned rescue of Greek texts by Arabs, et cetera. I don't know the state of current education, but in my time there wasn't any conspiracy to pretend that these civilizations didn't contribute to the Western civilization. On the other hand, I see a hateful anti-West nowadays that denies anything good ever came out of the West.
The big trouble, as far as I can see it, is that we've reached a point where the West is blamed for so many evils that apparently it no longer has anything positive to offer the rest of the world. Tell, what can Europe learn from modern Islam? It's a genuine question: what great science, or new philosophical or spiritual ideas, or innovative approach to civil rights, or economic theories, does Islam have to offer the countries of Europe?
Nice to see how quickly you are learning to speak my language, I am not a bad teacher am I?
You haven't taught me anything, I'm afraid. I've long believed that one of the West's contradictions is that it's impoverishing itself by outsourcing jobs to totalitarian countries. It's one of the reasons Europe is currently in the middle of an austerity crisis, with no end in sight. It's only making Europe vulnerable to the rise of fanaticism and extremist politics. I hope the EU will see reason, but this too I doubt. We'll see.
And I like my signature and I'll keep it, if you don't mind.
This world is a comedy to those that think, a tragedy to those that feel. -
Professicchio — 13 years ago(June 12, 2012 07:17 AM)
No, you're merely an Italian, from what I can gather from your film reviews. That hardly makes you an expert by birth on multicultarism and ancient civilizations. One learns about cultures from studying cultures, not from living in them. In fact, sometimes an emotional detachment from them actually helps to sharpen one's critical faculties. Being too involved in something makes one partial.
You are both right and wrong on that one: you are right about the emotional detachment but you are definitely wrong about "
One learns about cultures from studying cultures, not from living in them
", because what you learn by being part of something is far more than just emotional attachment, infact you can say that the two ways of learning, studying and living, can compensate each other but can never replace each other!
In a way I feel privileged because I have been able to do both, in separate ways, in completely distinct moments of my life. I have been an expact for almost two decades now and I can say I have learned a great deal about seeing the world "both ways" (sort of cliche somewhat), and do you want to know the funny side?
Talking about "emotional" detachment, I fell much more attached to my roots now that I have abandoned them, while before I simply hated it you could say (kind of explains why I left), ironic but not too uncomon among immigrants perhaps.
And I do not consider myself as merely an "Italian" for the simple reason that there is no such thing as a unified Italian culture (thank god, or we'll be just another averagely dull place like the rest of Europe. Just kidding, right), I consider myself a Mediterranean; there are places in Italy which I fell so out of place I might as well be on another planet, I was raised speaking a language that 99% of my "compatriots" do not speak and that is not uncommon around that cradle of civilization that is that sea.
But the West has never shied away from learning from other cultures. It adopted the Phoenician alphabet, Hindu numbers, mathematical notions from Babylonia and Egypt, the aforementioned rescue of Greek texts by Arabs, et cetera. I don't know the state of current education, but in my time there wasn't any conspiracy to pretend that these civilizations didn't contribute to the Western civilization. On the other hand, I see a hateful anti-West nowadays that denies anything good ever came out of the West..
Of course "
the West has never shied away from learning from other cultures
" because the West would simply NOT EXIST if it had not learned from other cultures for a start, but the problem I have with that reasoning, is not that it's wrong in itself (because it is not in a way) but it's the way it is perceived by most westerners as far as I have sadly experienced!
The way it's interpreted is that makes it look like the west being a "good and diligent student", tolerant and open towards other cultures, like that has always been the case. The reality is that knowledge did not came through peaceful reasoning and "democratic exchange" but by an history filled with aggression, warfare and conquer, it was not always the west who did it obviously but the fact that it came on top of it all big time that made all the difference.
Again that expression in the end is simply bollocks, and quite dangeruos bollocks too for the way it can be transformed in rethorical fascism, because it creates the overabused cliche of this perfect "west-east" duality that simply was never there to begin with: I do not consider myself neither a Westernern or an Easterner and I take offence on whoever wants to frame me in either. Ultimately it is nothing more than the worst form of racism: a racism that is diguised as something completely different! And I am not blaming you in any way, mind you, because I also in the end am guilty of using the same logic, unfortunately it seems to be the only way to get yourself understood these days.
The big trouble, as far as I can see it, is that we've reached a point where the West is blamed for so many evils that apparently it no longer has anything positive to offer the rest of the world. Tell, what can Europe learn from modern Islam? It's a genuine question: what great science, or new philosophical or spiritual ideas, or innovative approach to civil rights, or economic theories, does Islam have to offer the countries of Europe?
Again you are both right and wrong, VERY wrong. That overabused and tired logic you are expressing is only part of the truth, and half-truths are way more dangerous than complete lies, as the most brutal forms of ideological repression have learned to use to their advantage.
You are making again the same mistake you were doing before when you were speaking in regards of the Chinese, and that is you are being downright racist without even realizing it, and here I explain below.
From the way you have answered my point becomes transparent that you are making an arbitrary assimilation between two very distinctive realities: I a -
Eumenides_0 — 13 years ago(June 15, 2012 05:48 AM)
You're right, I've been very lazy and thoughtless in using Arab and Muslim interchangeably in these posts, and using the West as a monolithic culture. I did it mostly because it's easier, but I'm aware of the diversity of cultures within the West and the East.
Your comments on Islamic banks withstanding the financial meltdown are very interesting. I've looked that up and read some articles, and it seems to be true. Tighter regulation on greed is something I support, and it worries me leaders in Europe and the USA don't see the cliff the banks are driving us towards in their mad, unethical pursuit for profits. Of course in the West we're not oblivious to those problems, as daily protests demonstrate. Unfortunately, however, I fear our voices no longer reach our leaders. I wouldn't mind if the Islamic banking model were adopted in Europe, to see if it works. Perhaps it could change things for the better.
This world is a comedy to those that think, a tragedy to those that feel. -
Hancock_the_Superb — 13 years ago(June 24, 2012 07:25 AM)
I don't see the "Christianity is older than Islam" as particularly valid, for two reasons:
- Islam in the Middle Ages remained comparatively tolerant (not to say accepting) of other religious, at least Abrahamic ones, within its borders. No question if it would be better for a 15th Century Jew to live in France or Ottoman Turkey. Being a comparatively "new" religion did not prevent them from being more liberal than Christian regimes in that past. Why should it be an excuse today?
- At the risk of stating the obvious: we live in the now. We can't wait hundreds of years for Islam to "evolve" to roughly the state of Christianity today. We have to deal with Islam as it is today. We can embrace the moderate elements and scale back our presence in the Middle East, but there will still be Wahabbist/Taliban types out there who won't be satisfied until they crush all signs of other religion within their borders. And yes, al-Qaeda types with their chimeric dreams of a reestablished caliphate will be around.
"Haven't they replaced you with a coin-operated machine yet?"
-
Professicchio — 13 years ago(June 25, 2012 05:51 PM)
- Who cares? Why are you reducing this to a just a question of religious tolerance? And again another stupid argumentation that reduces the "Islam vs Christianity" field into an over-simplified issues of two alleged granitic blocks.
Do you really want to get serious about this argument? Than let's cut the religious crap and start looking at the reality at 360 degrees: the developement of countries all over the world has got as much to do with the nature of its religion (not too much) as it has to do with economical international policies, warfare, national identity, migrations, language, geographical position, international alliances, nature of the territory and the history of colonialism (both of the "classical" country-invading type and the more insidious behind-the-scenes scheming of the post WW2 era, so brillantly devised by people like H. Kissinger) and the list can go on and on.
Unless you want me to write a goddam book here on IMDb about how these things interact with each other you'll never understand anything of how certain religions/cultures have developed differently from others, are you willing to pay me for that? Than I might do it.
Comparing things like christianity and islam to each other is a lot more hard work than if they were like two brothers brought up in the same family in which the older is quiter and shy while the younger is difficult and aggressive, and even if it was so simple, would you just point the finger and call one the "bad apple" without looking into what their parents, relatives, school and all the rest are doing.
I don't excuse anything, I just understand that anything happens for a reason, and if you don't try to figure out that reason before you put your finger out and start pointing it at others, you will not solve anything and you might end up having that finger bitten. - Point n.1 partly answers your question but the problem is that, like most of others living on this hemisphere, you just simply do not understand that the evolving is happening as we type, and you just keep looking down, putting the fingers on the negative side of the others, without paying any attention to those among your ranks that are already probably screwing you from the behind.
No worries pal, I guarantee you will not have to wait hundreds of year to see a substantial evolution in most Islamic countries, though it might not happen during our lifetime; my money is on Iran becoming one of the most liberal countries in Asia (if not the earth) sometimes after the current regime fades or falls, and it will no doubt, but it won't be the only surprise of this century (major catastrophes aside).
But the real problem is not how these countries are developing, my real worry is how
OUR
countries are in risk of de-developing, thanks to things like bogus economical development (based now exclusively on random numbers, not substantial assets) that might as well be put into the hands of horoscope readers than economist, as it couldn't be worse anyway; read what I was saying to the previous poster above.
Oh, and great thanks also to those trillions they are spending on military enterprises that not only exasperate the situation in those countries with no benefit whatsoever for the invaders (there are exceptions obviously: all the warmongers disguised as legitimate corporates above all but let's not forget heroin dealers that now are back rolling in gold since the afghan invasion) but also gives religious extremists the perfect excuse to find new recruits; if before the invasion the "al-Qaeda types" where about half a dozen groups around the world now they might be ten times more, minus Osama Bin Laden though.
To be honest I don't think he was a real problem, I'm far more worried by the rest of his family, with all that petrol on their hands and cunning grasp of American assets, especially their balls.
"No but with the current economy they might do that soon, same to you also!"
- Who cares? Why are you reducing this to a just a question of religious tolerance? And again another stupid argumentation that reduces the "Islam vs Christianity" field into an over-simplified issues of two alleged granitic blocks.
-
Eumenides_0 — 13 years ago(July 06, 2012 02:21 PM)
my money is on Iran becoming one of the most liberal countries in Asia (if not the earth) sometimes after the current regime fades or falls, and it will no doubt, but it won't be the only surprise of this century (major catastrophes aside).
That would certainly be good, but also quite surprising if it happened. What makes you think Iran will become the most liberal country in the world once the regime of the Ayatollahs is gone? Why is it more correct than predicting that it will just be swallowed by another regime? In matters like this, everything is always just an educated estimate, but I'd like to know more about your arguments in favour or Iran becoming a liberal country after the fall of the regime.
This world is a comedy to those that think, a tragedy to those that feel. -
Professicchio — 13 years ago(August 23, 2012 08:20 AM)
Of course anything can happen as every single matter in the forecoming future will affect the outcome (especially if you consider the possibily of a Israel-Iran war, that might throw all the options high in the air), but I have solid arguments for my beliefs.
As far as I have experienced new generations Iranians, in their 20s or younger, are, far from idiotic western pre-assumptions, in very large numbers defiant towards traditional Islamic theocracy, both males and females: they are very cosmopolitan, love to party hard and drink alcohol (though not openly in their country, obviously, but they still do), listen to rock and rap music and engage in all sort activities that are not exactly in line with the Ayatollah's thinking, do you think this whole new generation will become "converted" once they get into positions of power? Me don't think very easily so.
As it is often the case with the irony of History, you need to get to one end first to end up right in the opposite end: just like World War 1 and 2 created the cement that prevented those countries responsible for those horrors to fight each other for the next 70 years now and 40 years of dictatorship under Franco built the rebel attitude that has now made Spain a beacon of European liberalism for more than 30 years. the list of examples goes on.
"Opposite attract each other" is not just a saying, it's true. -
tipsy_n2o — 12 years ago(December 30, 2013 03:44 PM)
It really is true that people see whatever they want to see. What I saw in the movie glorification of the Jesuits, yes, but also of their underlying philosophy of love and harmony. If someone watched the movie and became more tribalistic and antagonistic towards other cultures than they certainly did not get the message of the movie.
-
al666940 — 10 years ago(January 09, 2016 03:29 PM)
Say what you want, but NOBODY can deny the fact that it is jesuits whom have sided with the poor to the point of fighting alongside them.
Right or wrong on their part, they cared enough to do that. Who else did (without using them as cannon fodder like communist strongmen like Chavez for their own empowerment) again?