Debate
Free World: The book
Latest
Commentary
Suggested Websites
Timothy Garton Ash
Do American and European values differ?
| Nearly four out of five Europeans asked in one poll said they thought Americans and Europeans have different values. Almost as many Americans agreed. But the Inglehart Values Map (see p.257 of Free World) shows a much more complex picture. Do you think we have different values? If so, what’s the biggest difference? |  |
Debate - Page 8/13
Go to page 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13
Alex S., USA
Antti -
Why was deposing Milosevic the right thing to do and deposing Saddam the
wrong thing? By any sane count Saddam was the worse tyrant, though Milosevic
and Karadzic were pretty damn bad. It seems your only argument is that
Clinton was president then and Bush is now and since you like one more
than the other his actions are automatically more justified. I don't recall
Clinton and Blair mounting a concerted effort for multilateral U.N. approval,
nor do I remember Clinton going to Congress as Bush did. I would advise
you to take this to heart: some things are right even if George W. Bush
believes them, illiterate cattle rustler though I know he seems to many
Europeans (he seems that way to me sometimes as well). It ain't only Americans
who have a talent for closed-mindedness.
Phil Karasick, Seattle, Washington, USA
Ross Gurung in France wrote: "In light of all that,
everyone can notice that there is no facial racism in France. Except,
sometimes the incidents of Anti-Semitism of the Arab origin youths and
sympathisers of Palestine when they see on TV outburst of violence and
the misfortune of their fellow beings because of Sharon's inflexible politics."
|
I find it interesting, and highly revealing, that you would seem to put
the blame for blatantly anti-semitic and anti-Jewish hatreds and acts
of violence against Jews in France squarely on -- Jews in Israel. You
appear to be suggesting that Jews in France somehow "brought these
attacks upon themselves" because of decisions made in a completely
different country, in Israel. And in doing so, you also appear to be suggesting
that such horrific antisemitic attacks and assaults on Jews in France
are somehow "understandable" or "explainable" in the
context of Middle East events.
|
Perhaps you would explain why Jews in France should somehow be held "respionsible"
for events over which they have mo control and which happened in an entirely
different country.
|
If it is somehow "understandable" to you that Arabs and other
Muslims in France would launch horrific attacks and assaults against people
who are guilty of nothing whatsoever other than being Jews, can I assume
that it would be equally "understandable" to you if we in America
were to beat up Muslims on the streets, burn down their holy places, etc.
because of Bin-Laden's "inflexible" policies? After all, aren't
Muslims in America likewise part of the over-arching "world Muslim
nation" ?
|
Here in America, we don't call such things "understandable".
We call them Criminal Acts. And when people here commit such actions,
we arrest them and sentence them to a few decades or so in prison, so
they can cool their tempers and learn to understand why we don't hold
people in this country "responsible" for something that was
committed by others.
Phil Karasick, Seattle, Washington, USA
Antti Vainio in Finland wrote: "Sorry, I forgot that
only intelligent Americans travel."
|
Oh? How much intelligence does it take to walk onto an airplane? It takes
much more intelligence to realize that one does not have any "obligation"
to travel to the other side of the world or spend ones' money in a country
filled with anti-American, anti-Bush idiots merely to "prove"
that one is somehow "cultured" or "intelligent".
|
In fact, keeping my travel money circulating here in America is a much
better use of my funds, and realizing that is a much more significant
indication of intelligence. The French tourism and wine industries had
a considerable amount of their typical arrogance knocked out of them when
Americans decided to stay home in droves and boycott French wines in 2003-2004.
|
I previously wrote: "I'm an average American who happens to think
that my President (whom I helped to elect) is doing a great job. So great
a job, in fact, that I along with about 65 million other Americans voted
to give him four more years in office to continue his work. And if you
have a problem with my country's President, then I think I have a problem
with you."
|
Antti Vainio in Finland responded: "In that case you have a problem
with 95% of the human race".
|
In that case: Tough SH*T for the 95%, huh?
Phil Karasick, Seattle, Washington, USA
I had previously written: It's easy for everyone to be
literate in Finland when you have a homogenous population of only 5 million
and all of them are basically related to each other through interbreeding.
|
To which Antti Vainio in Finland responded: "Not a problem in Europe,
we have wildly varied gene stock, people who are ready to move in another
country and nonexistent borders."
|
Well, that's interesting, except that (as I already pointed out, and as
you already essentially confirmed), basically nobody is willing to move
to Finland.
|
So, you are again back to being a homogenous population of only 5 million
and all of them are basically related to each other through interbreeding.
And, once again, it's easy for everyone in Finland to be literate when
you don't have to educate people who come to you from virtually every
country on Earth and who speak something like 80-90 different languages.
|
I previously commented: You see, unlike the situation in Finland, people
from around the world actually want to come here to America to live, work
and study. I haven't noticed kazillions of people eagerly emigrating to
Finland, have you?
|
To which Antti Vainio in Finland responded: "You probably don't have
a clue how the European union works. You are allowed in one country you
allowed in all of them. The kazillions don't want to come to Finland because
we have a rotten climate and hostile population but yeah, kazillions want
to come to Europe, which is kind of selective members only club."
|
Well, I'm sure that's all fascinating, but it's irrelevent, because you're
basically trying to change the subject. I know fairly well how the EU
works as far as people being allowed to move across borders, but it's
still irrelevent. The reason it's irrelevent is, I was never talking about
people wanting to immigrate to the EU in general. I was talking about
the dearth of people wanting to immigrate to FINLAND specifically. That's
why I said: You see, unlike the situation in FINLAND, people from around
the world actually want to come here to America to live, work and study.
I haven't noticed kazillions of people eagerly emigrating to FINLAND,
have you?
|
So, basically, I said that lots and lots of people want to immigrate into
America (which they do), but hardly anyone at all wants to immigrate into
Finland. And you basically responded that "The kazillions don't want
to come to Finland because we have a rotten climate and hostile population".
So you are basically admitting that I was right all along - that no one
wants to immigrate to Finland, because of the rotten weather, and because
the population is basically inbred interbred and hostile to anyone who
is different or looks different. Congratulations Antti, we are in agreement
that Finland is a rotten place to live, with lousy weather and bigoted
hostile prejudiced and possibly inbred people. That's exactly why I don't
want to travel there. As I previously mentioned, I've seen snow, I've
seen ice and I've seen drunks. I don't need to travel to the other side
of the world to see them again merely to say that I've been to Finland.
And I prefer to keep my travel money circulating in America, thanks.
Phil Karasick, Seattle, Washington, USA
Antti Vainio in Finland wrote: "and finally to Phil
in Seattle: I just Spent a week in Sarajevo which is predominantly Muslim
capital of Bosnia-Herzegovina. fucking great time I had there, the city's
got the best vibe in the whole Europe."
|
That's very interesting,I'm sure, but why tell me? I really don't care.
|
Antti Vainio in Finland also wrote: "really, f*** off Phil. the Australians
with their cool attitude and backpacks conquer the world, your kind burn
in hell (the section reserved for American bigots). good fucking riddance".
|
Ahhhh, this must be the display of that reknowned European civilization
and manners that you were telling us about. Is this the part where I'm
"supposed" to say that I'm "dutifully impressed" ?
Don't hold your breath.
Phil Karasick, Seattle, Washington, USA
Michel Bastian wrote: "So because a few lunatics commited
mass murder the American government has a right to retaliate against people
who had nothing to do with it? Strange logic..."
|
My government and fellow citizens are not "retaliating against people
who had nothing to do with it". We are bringing democracy and freedom
to a formerly enslaved nation that has notknown anything except dictatorship
for decades.
|
If you want to see examples of people exercising a fictional "right
to retaliate against people who had nothing to do with it", I suggest
that you start in France, where Jews are being harassed and assaulted
because of events in the Middle East that they personally have nothing
to do with and no control over.
Phil Karasick, Seattle, Washington, USA
Michel Bastian wrote: "However, I absolutely refuse
to have the french, the germans or any other european state picked upon
and labeled "traitors" or "whimps" just because they
disagreed on Iraq. Especially since in my eyes (and in the eyes of most
of my compatriots) this decision by the French and Germans was absolutely
right and since in this case, the Bush administration was wrong, not the
french government."
|
Michel, Michel... *sigh* Creating artificial and imaginary "straw
man" arguments should be beneath you. I do not believe I have ever
referred to the French or Germans as "wimps" or "traitors".
They have the right to disagree with our policies. They have the right
to formulate their own policies. No one is challenging that. No one is
stopping them. What they do not have the right to do, is to impose their
beliefs and policies upon us in America.
|
Again, you are more than entitled to your opinion. Hoever, you should
know (as I believe you already do) that in my eyes, this decision by the
American government to Liberate Iraq was absolutely right and correct
and in this case, the French government, not the Bush Administration,
was wrong. And I am sure that years from now I am sure we will still be
having this debate and still not agreeing.
|
However, I am equally sure that years from now, the Iraqi people will
remember very clearly who Liberated them from the murderous tyrant Saddam
Hussein. And I think they will also remember very, very clearly who opposed
their Liberation, who secretly (or not-so-secretly) hoped that the U.S.
would lose and be defeated, and who was quite prepared and willing to
allow Saddam Hussein to remain firmly in power and slaughtering dissidents
for another 20 or so years.
|
I don't think the Iraqi peoples' memories of French and German actions
(or inactions) will be happy memories. What do you think?
Phil Karasick, Seattle, Washington, USA
Michel Bastian wrote: "Interesting, now you´re
admitting that Iraq was 'not a total loss'. A few weeks back you´d
probably have claimed that it was a total success."
|
Sorry to burst your bubble, Michel, but I'm not 'admitting' any such thing.
Iraq is indeed a success, although it is still very much a work in progress
-- as I have always believed it to be and said as much.
|
I previously wrote: "...especially considering that the Iraqi people
braved death threats and terrorism to stand in line and vote. (The Iraqi
people appear to attach more importance to democracy than many Europeans
do, in fact)."
|
Michel Bastian responded: "Again, this remark shows me that you´re
not interested in facts. You´re interested in being right and proving
to everybody else that the US are the best country in the world. Anything
that doesn´t support this assessment gets ignored or played down."
|
Not at all. The European press is famously hostile to Bush, and the English
newspaper "The Guardian" actually, seriously ran an article
entitled and claiming that "Thing were better under Saddam".
The European public evidently expected the elections in Iraq to be a bloody
farce. They weren't. The public reaction of the European public suddenly
became much more muted following the elections. The likely reasons for
this are that (a) the Iraqi provisional government now has newfound and
publicly proven credibility, and (b) despite the European public's best
hopes to the contrary, the clear majority of the Iraqi people do indeed
want genuine representative democracy in their country. They don't want
Saddam back in power.
|
Michel Bastian wrote: "You want me to tell you that Bush was right
and that Chirac ate crow? Well, my perception of the events was a bit
different. Bush has finally come to realise that he can´t just browbeat
the Europeans. He has come to realise that he needs their cooperation,
in Iraq and elsewhere (in Lebanon for example). Therefore, although he
can´t very well admit that he was wrong and Chirac was right, he´s
doing the next best thing, and that´s to tone down and pretend the
American/European rift doesn´t exist."
|
You want me to tell you that Chirac was right and that Bush ate crow?
Well, my perception of the events was a bit different. Chirac has finally
come to realize that Bush is not an "accidental" President,
an "appointed" President or a "selected" President.
Chirac has come to realize that Bush was indeed the American peoples'
choice, like it or not (and we know full well they don't like it, and
we elected him anyway, so deal with it). Chirac has to understand that
he needs U.S. cooperation, in Africa and elsewhere (Lebanon, for example).
And Chirac and the other European leaders and people are in a quandary
of their own making. They rooted overwhelmingly against Bush, and yet
he won decisively, which means the Europeans are quite friendless in the
halls of power in Washington, D.C. these days. Therefore, although he
can't very well admit that he was wrong and Bush was right, Chirac's doing
the next best thing, and that's to travel to Washington, D.C., congratulate
Bush on his apparent election victory, recognize that Bush is going to
be around for another four years, and see if there are ways to reduce
French-American tensions and work together on common issues.
Phil Karasick, Seattle, Washington, USA
Michel Bastian wrote: "However, what articles like
the one you cited do is play up on xenophobia, and very quickly, that
will lead to popular perception of immigration being the cause for everything
that goes wrong in the US and Europe. Case in point: the Minutemen Project
(that doesn´t have anything to do with terrorists, incidentally)."
|
I never once claimed that immigration is "the cause for everything
that goes wrong in the US and Europe". And I am on record as favoring
allowing continued lawful immigration into the U.S. (The key word there
being "lawful"). However, while most immigrants (the overwhelming
majority, I am sure) mean no hostile intent to the United States and wish
only to improve their lives and that of their families, the fact remains
that there are people out there (Al-Qaeda terrorists, for instance) who
very much do mean to do us harm and who will do so by exploiting any weakness
they can find. The 9/11 hijackers and mass-murderers were all living in
America, at least some of them illegally (they may have overstayed the
time allowed in the US according to their visas). Clearly they took full
and malevolent advantage of the relative openness of american society,
our relatively benign view at the time of immigration and our lax security
vis-a-vis so-called foreign "students". We have learned from
that bitter lesson. That's why there is a great deal more attention being
paid to the subject of immigrants now.
|
It seems to me that this is yet another "straw man" argument
being used by those who oppose the U.S. and oppose our President in order
to artificially manipulate the argument into a no-win situation for the
U.S. If we raise concerns that foreigners traveling to America may in
fact be Al-Qaeda terrorists, we are labeled "xenophobic". If
on the other hand we continue to take a benign view toward immigration,
we are jeered at by foreigners who deride us for the fact that the 9/11
hijackers had been allowed into the U.S. and that our faulty immigration
system allowed terrorists to set up shop in the U.S. and carry out their
murderous plot. One view has us being supposedly "racist, xenophobic",
the other has us being supposedly "incompetent". Once again,
since we are going to be pilloried or declared to be "wrong"
no matter what we do, we should act in our own best interests and put
our own national security first and foremost. I think I can virtually
guarantee that no one else will do it for us.
Tito Edwards, USA
The values are becoming dissimilar as the years pass by.
Ever since the 16th century at the height of the Renaissance, did Europeans
began to feel overly confident about their mortality. Especially after
the French revolution when Robespierre led the overthrow of the monarchy,
confiscated church lands, outlawed religion, and replaced the fleur-de-fleur
with the tricolor in order to extinguish faith and impose secularism.
These Œideas‚ would consume the rest of Europe, mistakenly
calling them enlightened and superior.
"I think therefore I am"
The famous quote by Descartes exemplifies this correctly. Europeans believing
that they were created without the ominous direction of God, began to
stray away from their Christian heritage, ergo (Descartesian), they began
to question morality in general.
All of which began to bring the idea of relativism into the hearts and
minds of Europeans. This has leaded them down the dark path of secular
humanism. Which has produced some of the most monstrous ideas and leaders
in human history by Karl Marx, Napoleon Bonaparte, Maximilien Robespierre,
Neville Chamberlain, Adolph Hitler, Friedrich Nietzsche, and Joseph Stalin
to name a few.
The results are catastrophic.
Two World Wars, genocide, three totalitarian systems, the breakdown of
the cultural fabric that binded them to Christianity and ultimately to
the sad exclusion of the mere 'word' of 'Christianity' from a 70,000 page
document called the EU constitution.
Within our generation, yours and mine, we will witness the greatest implosion
in the history of mankind with the continuing decaying and decline of
Europe. Europe is experiencing the greatest depopulation in its history;
even greater than the effects of the Black Plague.
These secular humanist traits that have created Europe‚s inadequate
morals and values have produced something that Europeans today are blind
to.
Because of these poor values concerning human development has created
smaller families. A time bomb so to speak. Most Europeans are having one
or no children because of their hedonistic culture of self-absorption.
This will cause the collapse of the "European experiment". Social
programs from Social Security, to Socialized Healthcare, and Socialized
Welfare will go bankrupt without the steady contributions of a working
class that is dwindling each year. The replacement birth rates of Europeans
have gone below the minimum that requires a stable (and growing population).
18 European countries are suffering negative population growths. Even
the mostly Muslim immigrations into Europe are insufficient to sustain
any growth at all.
I don't want to see this happen, but in the least pessimistic way possible,
at least it will happen to the Europeans so that ordinary Americans will
recognize the hollow truths of promoting homosexuality, hedonism, and
abortion on demand.
On the eve of the Great War, August 3, 1914, Sir Edward Grey of England
said „The lamps are going out all over Europe; we shall not see
them lit again in our lifetime.‰
I would like to add that the lights have not been lit since then and will
never be while Europe continues to propagate and practice secular humanism
in place of their cultural Christian heritage.
Indivisible, Under God. The quote that represents the United States of
America in its entire splendor is what the European Union has abandoned.
Tito Edwards, USA
Emilio,
By showing compassion and understanding towards the terrorists that bombed
the Atocha train station was very noble. How the Spaniards dealt with
it is another matter.
This occurred three days prior to a general election in which the conservative
government held a comfortable lead in the polls. Al-Qaeda claimed responsibility
because of Spanish support of the War on Terrorism. More specifically
the Spanish troops stationed in Iraq.
How did the Spanish respond? Like cowards.
They voted in Zapatero and his secularists to power by bowing down to
the terrorists demands.
As an American with a proud Mexican and Spanish heritage from my mother‚s
side, I never felt so ashamed. I only mention my Spanish relatives as
defenders of the Faith who were great warriors that extinguished the genocidal
700 year Islamic occupation of the Iberian Peninsula. If you consider
paying a protection tax, „jihzya‰, and second class citizenship,
dhimmis, as living in peaceful coexistence with the Muslims great, then
the Spanish will certainly be called kafirs again.
Juanma Fernandez, Basque Country
Phil Karasick wrote... hell! You've wrote enough for a
book! To say what? I've only got to say that I gave up reading this discussion
becouse you are so boring!
I wonder if you work so hard as you are soupposed to be a good American
and, if so, where do you get the time from?? You Americans have 30 hours
days?
Phil Karasick wrote..."We're killing the right guys in Iraq".
God, this guy must be crazy. Disgusting.
antti vainio, finland
Alex S wrote: Why was deposing Milosevic the right thing
to do and deposing Saddam the wrong thing?
I'm glad they are both in jail but the Serbs got rid of Milosevic basicly
themselves (with little help from friends). bombing of Serbia was pretty
random, cities that were strongly anti-Milosevic were hit as well so I'm
not sure it was that brilliant operation either. but Iraq is now just
a mess and I'm not looking forward the time when the mad jihadists trained
in the battles are trickling to Europe. Iraq during Saddam was certainly
rotten but their standard of living is now lower, there's no security,
their country is occupied and full of terrorists who are religious fanatics.
probably some of Iraqis already miss Saddam. If your president's intentions
were good he showed really poor judgement because this war was so idiotically
planned and he made it sound like a crusade
antti vainio, finland
to Juanma Fernandez:I don't think "Phil" is crazy, he's just pulling our leg and laughing his arse off when we take him seriously. why would a real redneck like that read Guardian and give a second thought to what people in some distant country thinks about Americans?
antti vainio, finland
Phil Karasic wrote: Congratulations Antti, we are in agreement
that Finland is a rotten place to live, with lousy weather and bigoted
hostile prejudiced and possibly inbred people.
to Phil:It's not that bad but I don't claim it's a paradise. still, I
think a lot of people from Iraq would like to move here. we don't have
trigger happy American liberators shooting our kids if they are are dumb
enough to go outside. generally, Europeans are not especially trigger
happy anymore and that's one of the essential differencies. I know you
are not interested but here we have most weapons per capita in Europe
after the Swiss but when we kill each others we use knives. one more difference
between USA and some European countries
antti vainio, finnland
to Alex S.
just to make it clear:when I wrote bombing the Serbs away I was referring
to the chetnics who besieged Sarajevo during the Bosnian war, not the
Serbians. they were not an army, just a bunch of worst scum on the earth
(supported with fervor by Milosevic, though) and by bombing them Clinton
did a good job
antti vainio, finnland
to Tito Edwards. congratukations, you have lost all the great qualities of your Spanish heritage, you are now just another American thug
Phil Karasick, Seattle, Washington, USA
Michel Bastian wrote: "However, what
articles like the one you cited do is play up on xenophobia, and very
quickly, that will lead to popular perception of immigration being the
cause for everything that goes wrong in the US and Europe. Case in point:
the Minutemen Project (that doesn´t have anything to do with terrorists,
incidentally)."
|
The facts of the horrific acts of terrorism committed in Europe and America
would appear to contradict you. The 9/11 atrocities were committed by
a terrorist cell of 19 men (mostly Saudi Arabians) who infiltrated into
America by fraudulently claiming to be "students" and who illegally
overstayed their student visas. Similarly, the Madrid train-bombing atrocities
were committed by a terrorist cell of people (mostly Morrocans) who infiltrated
into Spain and burrowed their way into Spanish society. Both atrocities
followed the same pattern -- acts of horrific terror and barbarism, committed
by immigrants (both legal and illegal) of the Muslim faith, who emigrated
from predominantly-Islamic countries, and who took murderous advantage
of the relative openness of Western-oriented countries to people from
non-Western countries.
|
And actually the MinuteMan Project potentially has a lot to do with preventing
terrorism. It's pretty much a 'given' that Al-Qaeda continues to want
to harm us and wants to commit further acts of terror on American soil.
Due to post-9/11 security improvements (better airport screening, heightened
checking of airline passengers), Al-Qaeda is finding it more difficult
to infiltrate into the U.S. by conventional methods. Given that the U.S.
- Mexico border is extremely porous and difficult to patrol continuously,
it stands to reason that al-Qaida will likely try to infiltrate into the
U.S. through the southern U.S. border. It's not only Mexicans who have
been caught trying to enter the U.S. illegally. The MinuteMan project
successfully drew attention to the inadequately patrolled U.S.-Mexico
border. perhaps now we'll begin to see some long-needed security and manpower
improvements to address the problem.
Phil Karasick, Seattle, Washington, USA
Juanma Fernandez in Basque Country wrote:
"I wonder if you work so hard as you are supposed to be a good American
and, if so, where do you get the time from?? You Americans have 30 hours
days?"
|
It's unfortunate that these posts don't have a date/time stamp to show
when they were posted. If they did, you'd see that I do my posting in
the late evening (after 11:00 p.m.), generally long after my workday is
(usually) over. I don't use my work-time for personal business (like posting
on bulletin boards). Of course, as a real estate professional I am accustomed
to working nights and weekends. It goes with the territory.
|
Juanma Fernandez in Basque Country wrote: "Phil Karasick wrote...'We're
killing the right guys in Iraq'.
God, this guy must be crazy. Disgusting."
|
I don't think there's anything "crazy" about killing fanatical
Islamic terrorists. I don't think there's anything "crazy" about
defeating murderous thugs who think they can destroy a newly elected democratic
Iraqi government, who think they can car-bomb their way into power. I
think what we are doing is wonderful. It's exactly what we should be doing.
I hope we keep doing it. We're going to win, too.
|
Of course, considering the craven and cowardly attitude of the present
Spanish government (the "government of choice" of Al-Qaeda terrorists
everywhere, because Zapatero does whatever Al-Qaeda tells him to do),
I'm not surprised by your attitude.
Mike, London
To Tito Edwards-
Well done, you've even managed to out- do Phil in your bizarre America-centric
view of the world. Just when I thought Phil was almost the perfect international
caricature of right wing America.
Some points to pick up on:
Descartes lived before the French Revolution, was a highly committed Christian
who, in the same book, went on from his famous 'I think therefore I am'
statement to attempt to prove the existance of God and was a great inspiration
for Christian theologians thereafter, his conclusion being that the existence
of God is a concrete fact. Indeed, the whole point of the book was that
it was a theological exercise to prove that ( a Christian) God exists
by referance to pure reason exclusively.
You site the period of the enlightenment as a departure from morality.
Presumably you feel we should return to the good old days when the sun
orbited the earth, science did not exist and the burning and torture or
heretics and women was a great day out for all the family.
You write-
'[secular humanism] has produced some of the most monstrous ideas and
leaders in human history by Karl Marx, Napoleon Bonaparte, Maximilien
Robespierre, Neville Chamberlain, Adolph Hitler, Friedrich Nietzsche,
and Joseph Stalin to name a few.'
Adolph Hitler was a Christian and the Nazi army considered themselves
a Christian army (a fact apparently conveniently airbrushed from history)-
the crosses on the wings of their planes were Christian, the soldier's
belt buckles bore the words 'God Is With Us'. This was the driving ideology
behind Nazism (Hitler's central manifesto for women was the three K's
[or C's in English] of Cooking, Children, Church). Fear of association
has subsequently led history (as written by the victors) to ignore this
Christian aspect of Nazism.
Neville Chamberlain?!? Please explain this one- I'm not sure how any humanist
and relativist ideas he may have had can lead us to view him as a monster
of history.
Nietsche has been described as a Romantic Nihilist, not a humanist or
relatavist. I assume you have a problem with him because he criticised
the morality of Judaic religion.
Stalin was an Orthodox Christian, but kept it quiet as Communism tends
to see religion as a tool of repression. It was not moral relatavism that
led to him behaving as he did- it was being a psychopathic megalomaniac.
Marx was not a relatavist- Marxism was a moral code which is held to be
universal to human civilisation.
I'm afraid I'm not too sure about the ideologies of Napoleon and Robespierre,
but I'm not sure French Imperialism necessarily emenates from humanism
and/ or relatavism.
Suffice to say Humanist and Relatavist ideologies are not responsible
for any difficulties Europe has suffered over the past few hundred years.
In fact, if we look back to feudal times we see a state imposed devoutly
Christian Europe engaged in permanent war. Indeed, around the end of the
medieval period the Pope- the most powerful political force in Europe-
condemned the whole of the Netherlands to death (fortunately this was
too big a task to carry out, although they tried).
You will notice from these totalitarian regimes you mention that the common
theme was hegemony of ideas and the enforcement of state defined monolithic
'truths'- something which relatavism is necessarily opposed to. 'Europe'
is a geographical term to be used as short-hand for an eclectic collection
of nations and peoples: therefore to try to impose the moral values you
seem to suggest as 'correct' would itself require the implementation of
a totalitarian regime. Perhaps the answer is for the State to just let
people be rather than entwine itself with a behavioural code (yes- behavioural:
it enrages me when people consider religion and morality as identical)
that intrinsically is religion? Relativism does not mean no morality-
only that morality is sociological, not existential.
Europe lost 40% of its population in the Black Death- believe me, to say
that Europe is facing a crisis of population in this way is just anti-European
propaganda. All that's happening is a few countries (such as the UK) have
a very slightly lower death rate than birth rate- the population of (an
already over-populated) Europe is still increasing, however.
And no, Europe is not being flooded by Muslims- that is patently more
anti-European propaganda, which is not even worth discussing unless you
want to get yourself some statistics.
If we want to discuss our 'inadequate morals and values' I would point
out that the USA has an image throughout the entire world of amoral capitalism
(no, I'm not a commie- I believe in capitalism, but I also believe in
morality). There are countless examples of this- such as the Coca Cola
factory in India which has decimated the local population by taking away
it's water resources with impunity. I'm not saying the Europeans are particularly
noted for moral stances, but the USA is most certainly no better. I feel
you are probably just equating religion with morality again.
And no, social welfare is not destroying Europe- European economic growth
is close on the heels of the US, and is accelerating faster. More anti-euro
propaganda: the American right would love it to be true as it justifies
their policies of removing responsibility of the state towards the individual.
Just to finish off: the American Constitution (drafted by Englishman John
Locke after the Enlightenment) considers the separation of Church and
State a central tenet. Therefore, this is an aspect that simply does not
differentiate Europe and America, as you seem to contend it does.
PS In reference to your second post- Muslims in Spain lived quite peaceably,
and it was not a genocidal 700 year reign. The genocide occurred at the
hands of the Christians when they decided to oust the Muslims from Spain.
Your conception of this period is out-of-date Christian propaganda- again
history is written by the victors.
antti vainio, finland
P*** off Tito. if somebody from the Basque Country thinks you are phony you have a problem. they are just too honest
Michel Bastian, France
To Phil Karasick:
> If you want to see examples of people exercising a fictional "right
to retaliate against people who had nothing to do with it", I suggest
that you start in France, where Jews are being harassed and assaulted
because of events in the Middle East that they personally have nothing
to do with and no control over.
As are african or native americans in many parts of the US. That´s
just racism and xenophobia, and it´s not comparable to governments
invading countries. The difference between France and the US in that respect
is that France hasn´t invaded Iraq citing fictitious Al-Quaida ties.
Michel Bastian, France
To Phil Karasick:
> I do not believe I have ever referred to the French or Germans as
"wimps" or "traitors".
You haven´t (at least as far as I can remember), but other people
have, abundantly.
> They have the right to disagree with our policies. They have the
right to formulate their own policies. No one is challenging that. No
one is stopping them. What they do not have the right to do, is to impose
their beliefs and policies upon us in America.
Which they did? Exactly how did they do that?
> Again, you are more than entitled to your opinion. Hoever, you should
know (as I believe you already do) that in my eyes, this decision by the
American government to Liberate Iraq was absolutely right and correct
and in this case, the French government, not the Bush Administration,
was wrong. And I am sure that years from now I am sure we will still be
having this debate and still not agreeing.
True enough. We might as well drop the discussion.
> However, I am equally sure that years from now, the Iraqi people
will remember very clearly who Liberated them from the murderous tyrant
Saddam Hussein. And I think they will also remember very, very clearly
who opposed their Liberation, who secretly (or not-so-secretly) hoped
that the U.S. would lose and be defeated
Nobody hopes the US will be defeated. We can´t afford that the US
should be defeated in Iraq.
> I don't think the Iraqi peoples' memories of French and German actions
(or inactions) will be happy memories. What do you think?
Depends on what Iraqi people you´re talking about. And incidentally,
I think the "Iraqi people" will remember the american and british
military stationed in their country and the thousands of Iraqi casualties
quite well, too.
Michel Bastian, France
To Phil Karasick:
> I never once claimed that immigration is "the cause for everything
that goes wrong in the US and Europe".
You haven´t, but many others have, in the US and in Europe. Not
a thing that should be amplified by fostering vigilantes and incendiary
journalism.
> And I am on record as favoring allowing continued lawful immigration
into the U.S. (The key word there being "lawful"). However,
while most immigrants (the overwhelming majority, I am sure) mean no hostile
intent to the United States and wish only to improve their lives and that
of their families, the fact remains that there are people out there (Al-Qaeda
terrorists, for instance) who very much do mean to do us harm and who
will do so by exploiting any weakness they can find. The 9/11 hijackers
and mass-murderers were all living in America, at least some of them illegally
(they may have overstayed the time allowed in the US according to their
visas). Clearly they took full and malevolent advantage of the relative
openness of american society, our relatively benign view at the time of
immigration and our lax security vis-a-vis so-called foreign "students".
We have learned from that bitter lesson. That's why there is a great deal
more attention being paid to the subject of immigrants now.
That´s fair enough. But again, the US, as Europe, should not be
admitting a vigilante mentality.
> It seems to me that this is yet another "straw man" argument
being used by those who oppose the U.S. and oppose our President in order
to artificially manipulate the argument into a no-win situation for the
U.S. If we raise concerns that foreigners traveling to America may in
fact be Al-Qaeda terrorists, we are labeled "xenophobic". If
on the other hand we continue to take a benign view toward immigration,
we are jeered at by foreigners who deride us for the fact that the 9/11
hijackers had been allowed into the U.S. and that our faulty immigration
system allowed terrorists to set up shop in the U.S. and carry out their
murderous plot. One view has us being supposedly "racist, xenophobic",
the other has us being supposedly "incompetent". Once again,
since we are going to be pilloried or declared to be "wrong"
no matter what we do, we should act in our own best interests and put
our own national security first and foremost. I think I can virtually
guarantee that no one else will do it for us.
Perhaps I should point out that I didn´t say that americans at large
are all "racist" and/or "incompetent". And of course,
the US government is and should be the only judge of how to deal with
immigration on its territory.
But the argument started when you inferred that France was allowing muslim
immigration to swamp it and when you cited an article that labelled France
as the "first state that would impose Sharia". Then came the
usual "antisemitism" tirade, which in turn led me to point out
that americans aren´t free of racism either. Perhaps we can agree
to a common ground: immigration isn´t a bad thing in itself, but
has to be controlled, and it has to be controlled by impartial, non-biased
and well trained state organisms (governments, mostly in the form of the
american border patrolin the US or european border police in the EU).
It shouldn´t be used as an argument for xenophobia or racism and
one shouldn´t foster a frontier or vigilante mentality in the population.
Michel Bastian, France
To Tito Edwards:
> By showing compassion and understanding towards the terrorists that
bombed the Atocha train station was very noble. How the Spaniards dealt
with it is another matter.
This occurred three days prior to a general election in which the conservative
government held a comfortable lead in the polls. Al-Qaeda claimed responsibility
because of Spanish support of the War on Terrorism. More specifically
the Spanish troops stationed in Iraq.
How did the Spanish respond? Like cowards.
They voted in Zapatero and his secularists to power by bowing down to
the terrorists demands.
No. What they did is vote Aznar out because he lied to them about the
results of the investigation into the Atocha bombing. Aznar alledged the
bombing had been carried out by ETA, in a rather obvious attempt at keeping
public opinion from swinging against spanish participation in Iraq. When
the public found out ETA had nothing to do with it they responded in kind
and sent Aznar packing. Some polls showed that had Aznar not lied at first,
he might very well have won the election. To call the spaniards cowards
because of that is unwise (and I´m being polite here). It´s
also insulting and it´s definitely not going to make them any more
friendly towards the US.
> As an American with a proud Mexican and Spanish heritage from my
mother∫s side, I never felt so ashamed. I only mention my Spanish
relatives as defenders of the Faith who were great warriors that extinguished
the genocidal 700 year Islamic occupation of the Iberian Peninsula. If
you consider paying a protection tax, ≥jihzya≈, and second
class citizenship, dhimmis, as living in peaceful coexistence with the
Muslims great, then the Spanish will certainly be called kafirs again.
That´s right, when current facts don´t carry your argument,
go back to the middle-ages. Just a little pointer here: the reconquista´s
been over since 1492. The spaniards have proven they´re more intelligent
than to go play El Cid with automatic weapons in Iraq just so they can
relive some medieval power fantasy, like you obviously want them to do.
Michel Bastian, France
To Tito Edwards:
> The values are becoming dissimilar as the years pass by. Ever since
the 16th century at the height of the Renaissance, did Europeans began
to feel overly confident about their mortality. Especially after the French
revolution when Robespierre led the overthrow of the monarchy, confiscated
church lands, outlawed religion, and replaced the fleur-de-fleur
I presume you mean the "fleur-de-lys", the lily in the coat
of arms of the french kings. "Fleur de Fleurs" is a perfume
brand by Nina Ricci (smells good, too).
> with the tricolor in order to extinguish faith and impose secularism.
These ‘ideas∫ would consume the rest of Europe, mistakenly
calling them enlightened and superior.
Oh, sure, now it´s all the french revolution´s fault. So by
your definition, the american declaration of independence and the constitution
were probably a mistake as well, since they were based on many of the
same principles, eh?
> "I think therefore I am"
> The famous quote by Descartes exemplifies this correctly. Europeans
believing that they were created without the ominous direction of God,
began to stray away from their Christian heritage, ergo (Descartesian),
The adjective is "cartesian", not "descartesian",
I believe.
> they began to question morality in general.
All <...>
Indivisible, Under God. The quote that represents the United States of
America in its entire splendor is what the European Union has abandoned.
Let me guess: you also believe in creationism and think that scientifically
proven evolution is a bunch of hogwash, right? I´m not going to
go into this discussion again. Just read all the posts.
Phil Karasick, Seattle, Washington, USA
Dear Michel Bastian: For your consideration....
|
FRANCE: DELUSIONS OF GRANDEUR
|
French President Jacques Chirac has made a career appealing to the glories
of his country's past. But his people are wondering if he knows how to
lead them into the future.
|
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/7857266/site/newsweek/
Ross Gurung, France
Hi Bill basher! How come your head is so much
crammed with such sheer filth!! Mind going thru‚ a check-up of your
pH (% of H2)? It could not be 7 anyway.
Sorry Uncle Sam, Phil Karasick confessed that he was a Hoover‚s
crap. Beware holy Joe, you are very busy with your full time job and it
is not a pretty sweet gig. If not how you could afford to beguile so much
time in writing such trash over and over again. Now you are nabbed. You
are neither a Wog nor a Wop but a Polka. Over here in France we love Poles.
They are millions especially in the north of France. The most renowned
amongst them was Ms. Mary Curie, the first lady who won twice the Nobel
Prize in Physics and Chemistry. But as far as you are concerned you must
have been a blatant (your favourite word) victim of Shoah. Your bitterness
shows if it is not you, somebody amongst your kith and kin must have been
one of the victims of this terrific human crime of the 20 Th. century.
Sorry for such a loss of 6 millions of them. Come to Berlin to see for
yourself what Germany did to atone for the beastly atrocities committed
when their forefathers in the very past became nationalists and self-centred.
It would be worth coming for your great lesson of man kind History.
Jews as a whole are nice, pacific and patriotic people and wherever they
are, they always contributed to the welfare and the progress of humanity.
Not to mention the renowned philosophers, scientists, bankers, writers
and Christ himself. Ill luck would have it they were most of the time
the victims of all sorts of opportunists to climb the ladder of social
status either in churches or in politics. It dates back to the ages of
Pharaoh Ramsey II (XIII c. BC) and Moses with his masterpiece of 10 Commandments.
But a dick ace like you who now plays the role of a poor victim for your
mind comfort, exactly like National front and Ramadan [The latter is the
heir apparent and predicator of Muslim brothers (Salafi) in France]. Do
you ever ask yourself a question time to time; Am I a nag?-as if.
It‚s said that every morning when Churchill used to throw a glance
at his arse into the mirror he was glad because he found the same always
divided into two. Brits applied the policy of divide and rule without
scruples: Ireland (1921), north and south, WWII (1945), west and east
blocks, India (1947), India and Pakistan (The Nation of Pureness), Palestine
(1948), Israel and Palestine, Korea (1948), north and south and so on.
Brits paid and still pay cash for their blunders of the past when they
manipulated Jinnah against Gandhi, the latter never wanted to tear India
in two, he died for this cause. Brits were obliged to welcome all those
Œspoons‚ they used in order to rule the natives and they followed
their masters to their Homeland. But their harsh attachment to their native
culture and religion deprived them of English well-to-do culture. As a
consequence, they remained confined to their community without being integrated
as well as assimilated except some of them who proceeded further with
their higher studies. Now their descendants of 3rd.or 4th.generations
desire to visit their origins, that means their primitive cultural humbugs
and religious fundamentalism and miscellaneous headache of late forties
and fifties. So dots became dashes.
No way! It‚s just not on. You neither need to be in a court gagging
order nor to be woozy. You just throttle down your pace. Just go and get
boozed up and have a nice time listening to the murmuring music of Pacific
Ocean and see on the screen the brand new movie, Star Wars (The Revenge
of Sith).
Some times words can kill as it happened last week when Newsweek wrote
nonsense about Guantanamo creek. No kidding here, gals.
When the USA takes pain to solve the rift between Israel and Palestine
every dammed problem of the Muslim world would dissolve into peace and
harmony. Bin Laden and his clique would disappear with their El-Qaeda
inside their turbans for good. Anti-Semitism in France and anywhere on
this globe is neither understandable nor tolerable but it is the direct
cause and effect of what happens between the two protagonists, Israel
and Palestine after the proclamation of 2nd Intifada, when Sharon deliberately
provoked his foes by paying an express visit to one of the shrines of
east Jerusalem. For the time being neither rational nor emotional issue
is under control.
Every monotheist religion would find its salvation in its respective aspect
if Israelis and Palestinians, all of them, procure their lands imperatively.
In this layout all these trappings of the buggers that are rotten to the
core, should not hamper to give Peace a chance wherever and whenever it
is possible. Germans say, ŒDie Menschlich Dummheit ist grenzenlos‚
means human foolishness has no limit of boundary.
I suggest you to mark you out as a man of understanding and discernment.
Come off, you cannot always win by freak, you are Bush buff though. If
you have a clout then things would aggravate. You can‚t survive
very long with no passion of thought nor whit of feeling. You opted out.
Better close down your junkshop. Beat it!
Walter, Belgium
It is appalling to see how many people seem to consider that individualist values in the US explains the intrinsically socialist "warfare state" that the US are becoming.
Phil Karasick, Seattle, Washington, USA
Wednesday, May 18, 2005 · Last updated
9:15 a.m. PT
Bill Clinton: Iraq changes good for region
By JAN M. OLSEN
ASSOCIATED PRESS WRITER
COPENHAGEN, Denmark -- Former President Clinton said Wednesday the political
changes in Iraq, including parliamentary elections in January, will help
bring stability to the region.
Clinton met with Danish Prime Minister Anders Fogh Rasmussen and a number
of Danish lawmakers during his visit. The former president spoke with
reporters before flying to Jordan for a poverty conference.
"The Sunnis and the Shiites, the Kurds and all the various tribes
can work out accommodations that will allow them to build a stable society,
I think that will be good for Iraq and good for the Middle East,"
Clinton said at the end of a two-day visit to Denmark.
In January, Iraq held the its first democratic parliamentary elections
to choose a 275-member National Assembly and provincial legislatures.
"There is no point living in the past," Clinton said. "Look
at where we are now. Everyone, all freedom-loving people would be better
off with a genuinely representative, effective, free government in Iraq
whatever your feelings are about what went on before."
antti vainio, finland
Alex S. wrote: Antti -
Why was deposing Milosevic the right thing to do and deposing Saddam the
wrong thing? By any sane count Saddam was the worse tyrant, though Milosevic
and Karadzic were pretty damn bad. It seems your only argument is that
Clinton was president then and Bush is now and since you like one more
than the other his actions are automatically more justified.
I think I once answered but anyway, I think the Serbian people toppled
Milosevic, not the almost random bombing. a Finnish friend of mine who's
been lot in Serbia told that cities like Novi Sad which were totally against
Milosevic where hit as badly as any other place. I was referring to bombing
of the serbs besieging Sarajevo during the Bosnian war. by blowing the
chetnics away Clinton did good while we Europeans were just quarreling
with ourselves while innocent people suffered horribly
João Castro, Portugal
Irrespective of being more or less often right, the fact is that the US have been permanently on war ever since their foundation. Shouldn't that make us all americans and europeans think?
Go to page 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13
