Being a Jewish mystic, I appreciate other spiritual traditions, particularly Semitic or Persian ones ... so I have been impressed by Rumi, who was born in Persia ... so I thought I would share a quote by Rumi that greatly impressed me ...
Only Breath - Jelaluddin Rumi
(translated by Coleman Barks)
Not Christian or Jew or Muslim, not Hindu
Buddhist, Sufi, or Zen. Not any religion
or cultural system. I am not from the East
or the West, not out of the ocean or up
from the ground, not natural or ethereal, not
composed of elements at all. I do not exist,
am not an entity in this world or the next,
did not descend from Adam and Eve or any
origin story. My place is placeless, a trace
of the traceless. Neither body or soul.
I belong to the beloved, have seen the two
worlds as one and that one call to and know,
first, last, outer, inner, only that
breath breathing human being.
Ibn Arabi is another Medieval Muslim spiritualist who is open to Persian influence, but who was born in Spain:
Garden Among the Flames - Ibn 'Arabi
(translated by Michael Sells)
Wonder,
A garden among the flames!
My heart can take on
Any form:
A meadow for gazelles,
A cloister for monks,
For the idols, sacred ground,
Ka'ba for the circling pilgrim,
the tables for the Torah,
the scrolls of the Qur'an.
My creed is love;
Wherever its caravan turns along the way,
That is my belief,
My faith.
I like Islam in video games because it gives me interesting shit to do. Particularly in Europa Universalis IV, where your goal as the Ottomans is to become a Super Islamo-Roman Caliphate.
I try to look for things that I could like about islam, but nothing really comes up. As a theocracy, is pretty disgusting in what it gets people to swear to, from how it treats women, to how it sees homosexuals, to the ideals it forces into childrens heads. Even the food of islam is grotesque, just google 'food of islam' and see what I mean, what it does to animals.
I suppose the only thing I could find likable of islam is its architecture
(http://cdn.earthporm.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/beautiful-mosque-ceiling-181__880.jpg)
(http://muslimheritage.com/sites/default/files/styles/695x421_centered/public/introduction_islamic_architecture_01.jpg?itok=aHA0gEXs)
But then, is it islam I'm looking at, or middle eastern culture, and so separating the two? This is why when I look to those regions, I try to look at if its possible to enjoy middle eastern culture that isn't influenced by islam.
The restrictions on what they can eat, plus the geographical locations of were Islam is concentrated, has led to the development of some fantastically tasty dishes. You're always in for a treat if you go to an Islamic restaurant.
Quote from: Atheon on November 25, 2016, 10:03:38 PM
The restrictions on what they can eat, plus the geographical locations of were Islam is concentrated, has led to the development of some fantastically tasty dishes. You're always in for a treat if you go to an Islamic restaurant.
This x100. Middle Eastern food is unfairly delicious.
Also about Rumi; while he was Muslim, the Sufi and the dervishes are honestly closer to "pagans" than Muslims. Very interesting sect, but alot of bad shit in them too. Rumi's works are amazing though, have his writings somewhere...
Quote from: Shiranu on November 25, 2016, 10:27:57 PM
This x100. Middle Eastern food is unfairly delicious.
Also about Rumi; while he was Muslim, the Sufi and the dervishes are honestly closer to "pagans" than Muslims. Very interesting sect, but alot of bad shit in them too. Rumi's works are amazing though, have his writings somewhere...
When Islam arose among the Arabs, they were barely civilized. The Persians were civilized for a 1000 years already. When Persians converted from Zoroastrianism and Christianity, they brought a higher civilized view into Islam. The Arabs have never forgiven them. Mysticism is not only ancient, it isn't sectarian itself.
Quote from: Shiranu on November 25, 2016, 10:27:57 PM
This x100. Middle Eastern food is unfairly delicious.
Shut the fuck up, you're making me hungry.
You're right though...
Quote from: PickelledEggs on November 25, 2016, 11:46:23 PM
Shut the fuck up, you're making me hungry.
You're right though...
*Silently eats left over shawarma wrap with homemade hummus and tzatziki*
Quote from: Shiranu on November 26, 2016, 12:51:29 AM
*Silently eats left over shawarma wrap with homemade hummus and tzatziki*
Isn't shawarma indian?
Quote from: PickelledEggs on November 26, 2016, 01:02:57 AM
Isn't shawarma indian?
Nope, Turkish (doner), Lebanese, Israeli and Arab.
Based on the Qur'an alone, Islam( submitting to the will of GOD) is a wholly merciful peaceful, rightly guided faith. Unfortunately, like most organized religions; it's practitioners as a majority, do not follow the teachings. They are plagued by a literal interpretation in many cases it seems.
peace
Quote from: popsthebuilder on November 26, 2016, 09:44:25 AM
Based on the Qur'an alone, Islam( submitting to the will of GOD) is a wholly merciful peaceful, rightly guided faith. Unfortunately, like most organized religions; it's practitioners as a majority, do not follow the teachings. They are plagued by a literal interpretation in many cases it seems.
peace
Their initial opponents, the Byzantines and Sassanids ... were weakened by constant warfare and plague. Except for that, it is doubtful that the Arabs would have been successful outside of Arabia. They naturally attributed their military success to their own virtue ... just as Nato attributed its victory over the Warsaw Pact to their own virtue ... then it was corruption from within that took down the Warsaw Pact ... and excessive military expenditure to defend against Nato, and their misadventure in Afghanistan.
It is impossible to know if Muhammad said any of the things attributed to him, or if his hagiography is realistic ... since it was the product of the second generation after his death. I take him to be a Sufi who was forced to become a community/war leader, because of oppression by his opponents. By the time Islam was spectacularly successful in war ... the Muslims needed a foundation legend to justify it. Nothing was settled politically, until well into the Umayyad Caliphate, after the opponents of the Umayyads had been disposed of. The Umayyads originally were deadly opponents of Muhammad, so they had no reason to show integrity to his legend. The Birmingham manuscript is disputed ...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Birmingham_Quran_manuscript
But it is very early, since it has no vowel marks, which were invented for the Quran no later than 689 CE. The material of the pages, could be older than the writing on it. Tradition has it that Uthman, the third Caliph, had one version of the Quran produced, and all other version destroyed, but it is known that a few private compilations survived at least as late as 656 CE (end of first Muslim civil war, immediately after the death of Uthman), as well as the Hadith material (compiled in 8th and 9th century). The Umayyads didn't have full control of their territory until as late as 692 CE (end of second Muslim civil war). There was early pointed (vowel marks) on the Dome of the Rock which was built in 692 CE, and a later Umayyad Caliph did a general reform of official Arabic as late as 705 CE. There is of course religious reasons to "early date" manuscripts in various religions. The Samarkand Quran (nearly complete) was believed to be Uthman's personal copy, but has been shown to be no earlier than 765 CE. The first sira literature (biography) came even later, based on the Quran and the Hadith (after 760 CE ... and sira were considered too "popular" by the Umayyad court). I think the evidence supports the idea that the Quran as we now have it, is pretty well what existed in 700 CE ... before that there are disputes and fragments ... and like the NT, no way to tell what Paul or Muhammad actually said, or their contemporaries wrote down (Paul had a secretary write his stuff, Muhammad had one or more of them, according to tradition). Sufism starts around that same time (no later than 728 CE) in reaction to the worldliness of the Umayyads.
I've never had Arabian food or Islamic food. I'm a bit jealous.
Quote from: doorknob on November 26, 2016, 02:32:34 PM
I've never had Arabian food or Islamic food. I'm a bit jealous.
I have had Lebanese and Egyptian and Moroccan.
Quote from: popsthebuilder on November 26, 2016, 09:44:25 AM
Based on the Qur'an alone, Islam( submitting to the will of GOD) is a wholly merciful peaceful, rightly guided faith. Unfortunately, like most organized religions; it's practitioners as a majority, do not follow the teachings. They are plagued by a literal interpretation in many cases it seems.
peace
I see Pops, you read the quran and the bible with one eye open and one eye closed. And you use a huge amount of blindness (to get through the shit in both) and fantasy. Both preach peace? :)))))) yeah, right!
interpreters say, the correct reading of Scripture is a mystery ;-) So is any ideology/religion not totally pacifistic (the Jains in India) OK? Or are we simply self-hating omnivores?
Did you mean to ask if any weren't?
Quote from: Mike Cl on November 26, 2016, 04:23:16 PM
I see Pops, you read the quran and the bible with one eye open and one eye closed. And you use a huge amount of blindness (to get through the shit in both) and fantasy. Both preach peace? :)))))) yeah, right!
I didn't say they follow the teaching. But they do teach the same things, just like the Baha'i, Zoroastrianism, core Hindu teachings, and many others.
I don't turn a blind eye to the hypocricy or prejudice of organized religions. I am very aware of them and actively attempt to bring them and the actual harmony of faith to as many people's attention as I can.
Peace
Quote from: popsthebuilder on November 26, 2016, 05:19:53 PM
I didn't say they follow the teaching. But they do teach the same things, just like the Baha'i, Zoroastrianism, core Hindu teachings, and many others.
I don't turn a blind eye to the hypocricy or prejudice of organized religions. I am very aware of them and actively attempt to bring them and the actual harmony of faith to as many people's attention as I can.
Peace
Yeah, I know, Pops. If all theists were as harmless as you, that would solve much. But faith is not harmony--it is simply profound and willful blindness. And that is why the faithful can be lead around by the nose and told that shit smells like roses--and believe!
The reason why people are dangerous is politics. I have something, and you want to take it, and I won't let you. We use ideology and theology to justify this ... but you shouldn't blame theology (other than being stupifying). In some societies, where politics and religion are one and the same (theocracy) this is a hard thing to separate though. Progressive America is post-Christian, it isn't really atheist. That post-Christianity is a threat, as everyone here knows.
Quote from: Mike Cl on November 26, 2016, 05:24:23 PM
Yeah, I know, Pops. If all theists were as harmless as you, that would solve much. But faith is not harmony--it is simply profound and willful blindness. And that is why the faithful can be lead around by the nose and told that shit smells like roses--and believe!
That's just fd up and wrong.
Given your own testimony about my faith based on your interaction with me, you seem to conclude the opposite of blind gullibility.....well maybe not the opposite, but still; so you can't justifiably say that the substance of the faith of others is wholly ignorant bliss.
Is it not true that the mass in general is not privileged to the truths and realities of things. Take science for example; the general mass may know a little of some of the very basics of science in general, but in no real way understand any of the fields of study with any breadth, let alone all of them. The same could be said for any scenario in life or experience I would think. Honestly though; I must agree to some extent, and this is a main drive for me and a remembrance of the reasons I started talking (forums) in the first place. People do need to understand that faith has two meanings or rather goes two ways.
If one has faith in the promises of GOD, then too they must be faithful to those promises. This has many different implications. Basically I'm trying to say that the actual faithful live faithfully, or at very least strive, or continually contend to.
This could easily be grasped and used by atheist or deists actually, and I'm sure it is. Basically it all goes back to the conscience. To live in accordance to the selfless conscience (there are many names for it (that one seems more apt to me)) is to follow what is good and right, and one should strive to attain to such at all conceivable points.
Also summing it up would be to say love GOD (of which there is a sort of connection to in the selfless conscience(it and life and existence in general are all of GOD, but so much more so the former more than the latter.))
And of course; love your neighbor as yourself.
Is it possible that some here dislike the theists themselves for x reason, more than the potential of a higher power?
The beginning of this post is a little harsh, and I agree that the seeming object of the faith of some is misplaced. But that doesn't mean faith in GOD is misplaced.
peace
Quote from: Baruch on November 26, 2016, 06:06:23 PM
The reason why people are dangerous is politics. I have something, and you want to take it, and I won't let you. We use ideology and theology to justify this ... but you shouldn't blame theology (other than being stupifying). In some societies, where politics and religion are one and the same (theocracy) this is a hard thing to separate though. Progressive America is post-Christian, it isn't really atheist. That post-Christianity is a threat, as everyone here knows.
What is post Christianity and how is it a threat?
peace
Quote from: popsthebuilder on November 26, 2016, 09:41:27 PM
That's just fd up and wrong.
Given your own testimony about my faith based on your interaction with me, you seem to conclude the opposite of blind gullibility.....well maybe not the opposite, but still; so you can't justifiably say that the substance of the faith of others is wholly ignorant bliss.
Well, yes, I can say that faith is blind and the substance of faith is wholly ignorance, whether blissful or not. I don't have faith in anything. This is what google says of faith: strong belief in God or in the doctrines of a religion, based on spiritual apprehension rather than proof.
synonyms: religion, church, sect, denomination, (religious) persuasion, (religious) belief, ideology, creed, teaching, doctrine
"she gave her life for her faith"
I need proof or evidence for something before I think that it exists or is an actual fact. Your faith demands no proof, and I think your bible says that blind faith is the best faith; true faith. I call it a fancy word for wishful thinking or just wishing something was or is true. A person of faith does not need to think or reason about something to accept it as actual fact. That is blindness of the worst sort.
I have not seen one shred of evidence that anything exists outside of nature. You, and others, insist that the natural world has to have a first cause. I'm sure it did--I have idea what that may be, though, so I just file that away under not enough evidence discovered yet to figure it out. I don't lose sleep over that though. Yet you then reject the need for your god to have a first cause. So, if all needs to have a first cause, then what caused the first cause??? That line of questioning can go on forever. Until I have some evidence that something unnatural exists, I'll have to say that no such evidence exists. God simply cannot exist.
Quote from: popsthebuilder on November 26, 2016, 09:43:22 PM
What is post Christianity and how is it a threat?
peace
Real atheists would reject everything in Western civilization, not just the Church and Synagogue. And cosmopolitan atheists would have to reject Eastern civilization as well ... so they are basically anti-social types like Stalin and Mao. Ultimately I think that while Hitler used both Christian and Pagan symbols, he was profoundly atheist (in the original meaning of the term). But the people here are bohemians, not real atheists, not real anti-social types. The Unabomber, a hermit, would be a better example, as were the Desert Fathers who sat at the top of tall pillars or sadhus in India growing atrophied limbs and foot long fingernails. Atheists here aren't atheists like that .... they are etymological atheists, who use etymology of a-theism to explain themselves.
Post-Christians are simply bad Christians or former Christians ... as most people posting here are. They really haven't stopped being Christian internally, just externally. But you may be right, that there is a universal conscience, natural or man-made ... and many posters would agree with you. Post-Christianity (self-examination would show this) is a threat to their self-image. They are still treif. Civilization and its discontents, a true nihilist would abandon all human comfort, and even human language, and live as an animal in the fields (per Planet of the Apes). And that might be our real future ... back to the mute animal state ... because what goes up must come down.
Quote from: doorknob on November 26, 2016, 02:32:34 PMI've never had Arabian food or Islamic food. I'm a bit jealous.
I've had some, though it was (probably wisely) marketed as Mediterranean food. A lot of the menu was Greek cuisine, but there was also a lot of Levantine cuisine (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Levantine_cuisine). I was particularly fond of the tabbouleh and za'atar bread, both of which originate in the Middle East.
If ever given the chance, go for Afghani and Moroccan food. I am biased towards the Levant, but jesus christ on a stick those two, especially Afghani , are out standing.
Halal Guys in NYC is great. It will give you massive diarrhea, but it tastes amazing
The food. Not the diarrhea
Quote from: Mike Cl on November 26, 2016, 10:25:22 PM
Well, yes, I can say that faith is blind and the substance of faith is wholly ignorance, whether blissful or not. I don't have faith in anything. This is what google says of faith: strong belief in God or in the doctrines of a religion, based on spiritual apprehension rather than proof.
synonyms: religion, church, sect, denomination, (religious) persuasion, (religious) belief, ideology, creed, teaching, doctrine
"she gave her life for her faith"
I need proof or evidence for something before I think that it exists or is an actual fact. Your faith demands no proof, and I think your bible says that blind faith is the best faith; true faith. I call it a fancy word for wishful thinking or just wishing something was or is true. A person of faith does not need to think or reason about something to accept it as actual fact. That is blindness of the worst sort.
I have not seen one shred of evidence that anything exists outside of nature. You, and others, insist that the natural world has to have a first cause. I'm sure it did--I have idea what that may be, though, so I just file that away under not enough evidence discovered yet to figure it out. I don't lose sleep over that though. Yet you then reject the need for your god to have a first cause. So, if all needs to have a first cause, then what caused the first cause??? That line of questioning can go on forever. Until I have some evidence that something unnatural exists, I'll have to say that no such evidence exists. God simply cannot exist.
I agree that all is natural. But the argument that a thing outside of the laws of the known universe must conform to those same laws is silly to me. Just because a thing isn't readily observable or readily testable through limited scientific means doesn't mean it is supernatural or make believe.
Google's usually pretty accurate but faith isn't synonymous with church or religion and blind faith. Those can be related but not synonyms.
Anyway.
Peace
Islam was originally a butchering jihad across Northern Africa killing all Christians along the way. It seems to have stayed that way. From sacking Constantinople on the east of Europe to attacking Spain and Italy from the south and West, it was after Europe from the start. And since Christian Europe was attacked by Vikings from the north, they had a hard time for a while.
The surviving Europeans, horrible thugs though they were (forcibly), did have some grievances toward the Islamists and Vikings. I don't care 2 figs about the religions, but let's not forget who attacked who first.
Quote from: Cavebear on November 28, 2016, 03:13:10 AM
Islam was originally a butchering jihad across Northern Africa killing all Christians along the way. It seems to have stayed that way. From sacking Constantinople on the east of Europe to attacking Spain and Italy from the south and West, it was after Europe from the start. And since Christian Europe was attacked by Vikings from the north, they had a hard time for a while.
The surviving Europeans, horrible thugs though they were (forcibly), did have some grievances toward the Islamists and Vikings. I don't care 2 figs about the religions, but let's not forget who attacked who first.
Like today, the Romans were in the Middle East 700 years before Muhammad, and that doesn't count the Greeks who were there back during the Trojan War (it is in Asia Minor). It is like arguing that some Native Americans were pacifist (they never were). Who did it first? Caine.
Quote from: PickelledEggs on November 27, 2016, 02:03:28 AM
Halal Guys in NYC is great. It will give you massive diarrhea, but it tastes amazing
Care to spend a few hours in a halal slaughter house? It is quite educational.
see here (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/shopping-and-consumer-news/11384505/Secret-halal-slaughterhouse-film-reveals-horrific-animal-abuse.html)
pr126 ... are you vegetarian? And if you are, when will you stop engaging in terrorism against the plant kingdom?
All animal slaughter ... is awful. But people are awful, so it is OK ... chill.
Quote from: Baruch on November 29, 2016, 12:44:07 PM
pr126 ... are you vegetarian? And if you are, when will you stop engaging in terrorism against the plant kingdom?
All animal slaughter ... is awful. But people are awful, so it is OK ... chill.
Not a vegetarian. But I find halal killing unacceptable.
Now some here will use a tu quoque on the jewish orthodox practice, but it is not the same by a long shot.
First, compare the numbers of orthodox Jews with the number of Muslims.
Second, unlike Muslims, the Jews are not forcing non Jews to eat kosher.
Here in the UK most public places such as schools, prisons, hospitals, etc are serving halal food without the consent of non Muslims.
Supermarkets are not labeling meat product if it is halal or not. (By EU edict).
So customers do not know what they are buying.
The halal meat industry is charging extra, and some of that money is financing jihad.
Also it is promoting sharia by stealth.
https://youtu.be/3gYq2DQG1zI
Ah Pat Condell, the world's biggest Islamophobe.
No such thing as an Islamophobe.
It is a made up word without logic, invented to shut up discussion on Islam.
How does Christianophobe sound to you? Does it make sense?
Quote from: pr126 on December 01, 2016, 07:09:00 AM
No such thing as an Islamophobe.
It is a made up word without logic, invented to shut up discussion on Islam.
How does Christianophobe sound to you? Does it make sense?
Don't be so out of style ... it is triggering now, not phobia ;-)
Pr126 ... you are Pat Condell ;-( You are subsidizing Saudi Arabia by buying petrol.
If you don't want to subsidize Muslims in your country, don't go to their businesses. But unless you are the Queen, don't tell other Brits what they can or can't do. You are a one man dictatorship, and the Queen hasn't authorized you. Don't like a particular method of slaughter ... then kill your own bloody animals.
Quote from: Baruch on December 01, 2016, 07:16:45 AM
Don't be so out of style ... it is triggering now, not phobia ;-)
Pr126 ... you are Pat Condell ;-( You are subsidizing Saudi Arabia by buying petrol.
If you don't want to subsidize Muslims in your country, don't go to their businesses. But unless you are the Queen, don't tell other Brits what they can or can't do. You are a one man dictatorship, and the Queen hasn't authorized you. Don't like a particular method of slaughter ... then kill your own bloody animals.
I do not own a car, and I do not drive.
Quote from: pr126 on December 01, 2016, 08:28:57 AM
I do not own a car, and I do not drive.
You benefit from those who do ... so you support the King of Arabia and his bloody Yemen war ... just the same. Britain would have to cut off all outside trade, and financial flows, to actually not be implicated in Riyadh and Yemen. And you as a citizen, are responsible for your government's actions.
Quote from: Baruch on December 01, 2016, 12:51:57 PM
You benefit from those who do ... so you support the King of Arabia and his bloody Yemen war ... just the same. Britain would have to cut off all outside trade, and financial flows, to actually not be implicated in Riyadh and Yemen. And you as a citizen, are responsible for your government's actions.
LOL.
Don't forget that I am also responsible for the climate change. Among other things.
One thing in my defence, - I did not vote for Trump.
Quote from: pr126 on December 01, 2016, 07:09:00 AM
No such thing as an Islamophobe.
It is a made up word without logic, invented to shut up discussion on Islam.
How does Christianophobe sound to you? Does it make sense?
Yes it makes sense if you think all Christians, no matter how mild, are uniformly evil and plotting to get you. I would then call you a Christianophobe.
Now I hate the Religious Right, but I have no problems with most Christians, who happen to be mild, or even liberal. Same goes with Islam. I hate the extremists, but I have no problem with the mild moderate and liberal Muslims.
So yes, Islamophobia makes as much sense as anti-Semitism makes sense.
Quote from: pr126 on December 01, 2016, 02:21:07 PM
LOL.
Don't forget that I am also responsible for the climate change. Among other things.
One thing in my defence, - I did not vote for Trump.
"All Muslims are guilty for what their ideological and political brethren do!"
"I'm not guilty for what my ideological and political brethren, who I directly fund through taxes, do!"
Quote from: popsthebuilder on November 26, 2016, 09:44:25 AM
...it's practitioners as a majority, do not follow the teachings. They are plagued by a literal interpretation in many cases it seems.
Much like the American Christians. Very few have even read the whole Bible, and many of
the teachings and commandments of Jesus are completely ignored (http://www.agnostic-library.com/ma/scriptural-passages-christians-need-to-read-know-and-obey/). I don't see why we should expect Islam to be any different.
I do very much like Islamic art, though - very geometric, since they were forbidden to portray living beings in their art. And I agree that their architecture rocks!
https://www.google.com/search?q=islamic+art&biw=1024&bih=631&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjP-MKf79PQAhUrjlQKHSeIAW0Q_AUIBigB
Quote from: pr126 on December 01, 2016, 02:21:07 PM
LOL.
Don't forget that I am also responsible for the climate change. Among other things.
One thing in my defence, - I did not vote for Trump.
Neither did I, but the Cultural Marxists would tell you that a vote for anyone other than Hillary, was a vote for Trump. I can only hope they will end up like Fidel.
Quote from: Baruch on December 01, 2016, 08:04:05 PM
Neither did I, but the Cultural Marxists would tell you that a vote for anyone other than Hillary, was a vote for Trump. I can only hope they will end up like Fidel.
Actually, a mathematician will tell you that a vote for anyone other than Hillary was a vote for Trump. And the numbers showing Stein votes in Michigan, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania numbering greater than Trump's margin prove this point.
No idea what a "cultural Marxist" is. Sounds like a bogus term to me.
Quote from: Atheon on December 02, 2016, 12:26:14 AM
Actually, a mathematician will tell you that a vote for anyone other than Hillary was a vote for Trump. And the numbers showing Stein votes in Michigan, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania numbering greater than Trump's margin prove this point.
No idea what a "cultural Marxist" is. Sounds like a bogus term to me.
Some 3rd party voters would have gone to Trump, or not voted. But I agree that without the 3rd parties in this and 2000 it would have resulted in a Democratic President.
Atheon wrote:QuoteNo idea what a "cultural Marxist" is. Sounds like a bogus term to me.
You are living it. It's called reality.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gIdBuK7_g3M
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GdbSP_Ramvs
Quote from: Atheon on December 02, 2016, 12:26:14 AM
Actually, a mathematician will tell you that a vote for anyone other than Hillary was a vote for Trump. And the numbers showing Stein votes in Michigan, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania numbering greater than Trump's margin prove this point.
No idea what a "cultural Marxist" is. Sounds like a bogus term to me.
"Cultural Marxist" are the liberal intelligentsia corrupting our youth into believing all the terrible things our youth learn in college.
Just saying "Communist" or "Marxist" professors are corrupting our youth fell out of favour, but we gotta keep that good ol' cold war mindset alive, so they are now "Cultural Marxists". Same shit, different name. It's the fear that our kids might actually learn something in university that we disagree with and thus the intelligentsia establishment is out to destroy our society.
Edit: Actually, from the first 10 minutes or so of his video... "Secularism is really gaining influence in our universities, and in Holywood..." saying some old white guy who looks alot like Pat Robinson (I didn't see a name, so maybe that is him?). So I guess I forgot something, it's SECULAR Communist Liberal Marxists taking over our colleges. Terrible stuff.
Quote from: Shiranu on December 02, 2016, 01:58:57 AM
"Cultural Marxist" are the liberal intelligentsia corrupting our youth into believing all the terrible things our youth learn in college.
Just saying "Communist" or "Marxist" professors are corrupting our youth fell out of favour, but we gotta keep that good ol' cold war mindset alive, so they are now "Cultural Marxists". Same shit, different name. It's the fear that our kids might actually learn something in university that we disagree with and thus the intelligentsia establishment is out to destroy our society.
Edit: Actually, from the first 10 minutes or so of his video... "Secularism is really gaining influence in our universities, and in Holywood..." saying some old white guy who looks alot like Pat Robinson (I didn't see a name, so maybe that is him?). So I guess I forgot something, it's SECULAR Communist Liberal Marxists taking over our colleges. Terrible stuff.
Secularism seems to be increasing in popularity. Glad I was on the forefront as an atheist teen in 1963.
QuoteSecularism seems to be increasing in popularity.
I would definitely agree with that, and I would say not just for atheists (obviously) but even people who are still very devout want their lives to be secular and their religious lives to be private affairs.
Secularism is something that we as atheists should value.
Right-wingnuts love to attach the word "Marxism" to everything they hate.
Abortion? Marxism!
Gay rights? Marxism!
Black people voting? Marxism!
Jews existing? Marxism!
Women working outside the home? Marxism!
Science? Marxism!
Public libraries? Marxism!
People entering the country whose skin isn't lily white? Marxism!
Moooooooslims? Marxism!
This is why "Cultural Marxism" is a bogus concept. "Cultural workers' control of the means of production" simply doesn't make sense.
Quote from: Atheon on December 02, 2016, 02:51:35 AM
Secularism is something that we as atheists should value.
Right-wingnuts love to attach the word "Marxism" to everything they hate.
Abortion? Marxism!
Gay rights? Marxism!
Black people voting? Marxism!
Jews existing? Marxism!
Women working outside the home? Marxism!
Science? Marxism!
Public libraries? Marxism!
People entering the country whose skin isn't lily white? Marxism!
This is why "Cultural Marxism" is a bogus concept. "Cultural workers' control of the means of production" simply doesn't make sense.
Secularism isn't just something we should value, it is what we are. We ARE secular.
The indoctrination is successful when the indoctrinated is completely unaware that he / she has been indoctrinated with an ideology.
Just like in a religion, the indoctrinated will defend the ideology to the end.
They will also reject that they been indoctrnated.
That is how it works. Indoctrination is complete.
(https://thumbs.dreamstime.com/x/tin-foil-6631540.jpg)
Quote from: pr126 on December 02, 2016, 05:06:23 AM
The indoctrination is successful when the indoctrinated is completely unaware that he / she has been indoctrinated with an ideology.
Just like in a religion, the indoctrinated will defend the ideology to the end.
They will also reject that they been indoctrnated.
That is how it works. Indoctrination is complete.
I would like to know what I have been indoctrinated to. I am not democrat or republican, capitalist or communist. I have no theistic belief, I am not superstitious. I am an omnivore. I neither lead nor follow. I don't even think in terms of gender. I am what you don't think exists.
Some of us are Americans, not citizens of the world. If you are nationalist, instead of internationalist or culturally relativist rather than culturally absolutist ... then you aren't a cultural Marxist, otherwise you are. But it is poorly named. I call them "tools of George Soros". Soros and Marx were both Jewish and progressives. Technically they are all Mensheviks ... Trotskyites ... Stalin was a kind of nationalist, even if he was Georgian not Russian. Mao and Castro are nationalists too ... they only support exporting revolution ... as a way to distract the Capitalists or create a buffer (Warsaw Pact & N Korea). Their primary tyranny is against their own citizens.
On the other hand, being nationalist and culturally absolutist ... has its own problems ... see Hitler.
Communists hide as Socialists. Socialists hide as Progressives. As ideologies, I would have to fight them ideologically, even if they were only a domestic problem (not a fifth column for foreigners, like the Muslims coming into Europe are). I have to ideologically fight the Democrats and Republicans, because one is Menshevik and the other is Bolshevik. Guess which is which ;-(
The purpose of college isn't education, it is a continuation of the indoctrination of public school, the baby-sitting of public school. Most people can get thru 16 years of so called education, and be unable to exercise critical thought ... which is what the goal is. Society doesn't want critics, it wants workers and soldiers. Sometimes, like in the 60s, the college system fails ... and we are still dealing with the fallout of that failure (to draft all the college kids to Vietnam).
Quote from: Baruch on December 02, 2016, 07:14:49 AM
Some of us are Americans, not citizens of the world. If you are nationalist, instead of internationalist or culturally relativist rather than culturally absolutist ... then you aren't a cultural Marxist, otherwise you are. But it is poorly named. I call them "tools of George Soros". Soros and Marx were both Jewish and progressives. Technically they are all Mensheviks ... Trotskyites ... Stalin was a kind of nationalist, even if he was Georgian not Russian. Mao and Castro are nationalists too ... they only support exporting revolution ... as a way to distract the Capitalists or create a buffer (Warsaw Pact & N Korea). Their primary tyranny is against their own citizens.
On the other hand, being nationalist and culturally absolutist ... has its own problems ... see Hitler.
Communists hide as Socialists. Socialists hide as Progressives. As ideologies, I would have to fight them ideologically, even if they were only a domestic problem (not a fifth column for foreigners, like the Muslims coming into Europe are). I have to ideologically fight the Democrats and Republicans, because one is Menshevik and the other is Bolshevik. Guess which is which ;-(
The purpose of college isn't education, it is a continuation of the indoctrination of public school, the baby-sitting of public school. Most people can get thru 16 years of so called education, and be unable to exercise critical thought ... which is what the goal is. Society doesn't want critics, it wants workers and soldiers. Sometimes, like in the 60s, the college system fails ... and we are still dealing with the fallout of that failure (to draft all the college kids to Vietnam).
Oh well, then in THAT case, I am not remotely a "cultural marxist" of any sort. Sounds like a sad life.
You probably don't spout French Existentialist poetry, wear a beret, and hold a cigarette in a funny way either ;-) Never was a hipster myself either.
Quote from: Shiranu on December 02, 2016, 05:11:59 AM
(https://thumbs.dreamstime.com/x/tin-foil-6631540.jpg)
Meshed moslem art IS impressive.
Quote from: Baruch on December 02, 2016, 07:14:49 AMIf you are nationalist ... then you aren't a cultural Marxist, otherwise you are.
Nationalists are the bad guys... so then the cultural marxists must be the good guys.
Quote from: Atheon on December 02, 2016, 12:26:14 AM
Actually, a mathematician will tell you that a vote for anyone other than Hillary was a vote for Trump. And the numbers showing Stein votes in Michigan, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania numbering greater than Trump's margin prove this point.
No idea what a "cultural Marxist" is. Sounds like a bogus term to me.
I think you are correct--cultural Marxist is a bogus term.
Like 2000, like 2016. *sigh*
Quote from: Atheon on December 02, 2016, 08:27:53 AM
Nationalists are the bad guys... so then the cultural marxists must be the good guys.
There are no good guys, just egomaniacs ;-)
I like how Islam teaches equality between men, women, and all sexual orientations.
What I like about Islam is the tolerance towards other religions.
Quote from: Gestas on January 29, 2017, 02:01:45 AM
I like how Islam teaches equality between men, women, and all sexual orientations.
Do put a /sarc tag ... otherwise the old men posting here get confused. You too Pr126, you are one of the old men ;-)
Personally, I am not in favor of equality ... though I have nothing against all you other people, who really aren't equal to anyone, not even yourselves (at a previous point in time). What people want is Rousseau's noble savages, living in nature, with Marx the kosher hunter sharing his kill with the whole tribe. In actual practice it wasn't that way, Rousseau and Marx were terrible anthropologists. Continuous small scale inter-tribal warfare .. as in New Guinea a century ago ... is the norm. That and the "murder game" where you make a best friend, and then murder him. Post-modern tribalists should go stick a pig tusk thru their septum.
Sarc tag? No. Poe. (http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Poe)
Marx the kosher hunter?
Groucho Marx?
Muslims also make fantastic bombs.
Moslems made great rotational art...