The Growing Trend Toward Fascism in Israel

Moderators: Elvis, DrVolin, Jeff

Postby Joe Hillshoist » Sat Feb 07, 2009 8:56 pm

AlicetheKurious wrote:
Alice, when a person who was physically or sexually abused as a child perpetuates similar abuse as an adult that doesn't justify their crime.


It is very dangerous and wrong to confuse people with states. They are very different. A state is not human: it's a mechanism that people invent and set up, to regulate their interactions and to accomplish certain objectives.


Fair enough, but throughout history states have been infected by the pathologies that afflict the people that hold power. In that sense Israel seems to be acting out pathologies. And in that sense, the idea that "Zionism is a mental illness" could hold some validity.

Despite the fact that the sentence is so loaded.

I wouldn't want to say on a thread when some former posters have been posting tho, cos I don't trust how they would interpret and use what I said. And mental illness is a cause for compassion in my book. I don't think the state of Israel deserves any compassion for its actions in Gaza.

If its victims show mercy in their calls for justice that would be a real example of great human spirit. But I dunno if I could do that in their position.


God forbid. Though some individuals may suffer permanent mental illness, there's no excuse for a state to enable, still less reward and glorify, any crimes they commit against other people. If that is how a state functions, it needs to either be modified if possible, or dissolved and replaced with something better.


I comletely agree.
Joe Hillshoist
 
Posts: 10594
Joined: Mon Jun 12, 2006 10:45 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Postby AlicetheKurious » Sun Feb 08, 2009 3:51 am

slimmouse wrote:
AlicetheKurious wrote:
It is very dangerous and wrong to confuse people with states. They are very different. A state is not human: it's a mechanism that people invent and set up, to regulate their interactions and to accomplish certain objectives.



Not wishing to throw this thread completely off topic, Alice, but how about provably Bullshit religions ?


I don't understand the question, slimmouse. Could you clarify it? (I don't think it's off-topic, or, no more than is becoming usual around here).
"If you're not careful the newspapers will have you hating the oppressed and loving the people doing the oppressing." - Malcolm X
User avatar
AlicetheKurious
 
Posts: 5348
Joined: Thu Nov 30, 2006 11:20 am
Location: Egypt
Blog: View Blog (0)

Postby alwyn » Sun Feb 08, 2009 5:08 am

[quote=Paul Levy] As a human being of Jewish heritage, I feel deeply ashamed by what Israel is acting out in Gaza. I feel so shocked by the horror of what Israel is doing to the Palestinians that it has literally taken me a few weeks to sufficiently integrate the trauma triggered within me so that I could begin to find words. I feel as if I am sitting in the audience watching a family member who I love perform on stage, and because of my intimate connection and identification with my beloved family member, I am completely mortified by what I see them unconsciously acting out in the world theater. I am rendered numb and speechless, as my face turns pale and my breath is taken away by the extent of Israel's criminal and immoral insanity. It is like watching a dark, destructive inhuman energy making a people its instrument.[/quote]

A good (albeit scholarly verbose) article on trauma and it's outgassing, as he put it. I don't think he was saying that we should only have compassion for Israel. It is useful to know where they're coming from, but it certainly doesn't excuse their behavior, and it must be stopped.

And, Alice, in your quote, it looked like some of your trauma was causing you to slightly slant his article, but it was a good illustration, none the less.

I am impressed with Alice's very sane distinction between the state and the person. My anarchistic friends would like me to believe that the root of all evil is the state, but i have an idealists dream that we could have one based upon the common welfare...keep dreaming, I guess.

I thought it was also well expressed in the article relating the US's attitude towards Israel, vis a vis it's own genocide in it's expansionist period. More repressed trauma that puts it into the enablers column. Still, again, knowing the cause of the problem doesn't really give us any solutions, does it?

I am traumatized by what I see over there, and I know, unlike Alice, that I see maybe 1% of it. I am more traumatized by not knowing what to DO about it. Blogging is merely psychic relief, of a sort. Maybe people will read it, and think about their actions. I know at least one rather belligerent and illiterate Israeli blogger read mine :twisted:

So, here's a question. We all know what the problem is, whatever name we choose to call it, (and fighting over the name isn't really going to help us towards a solution). Anyone got any suggestions for a solution? It's critical.

Astrologically (sorry to infuse such a woo-woo topic here) our current passage through space (described by the Mayan calander) seems to result in a sort of psychic and etheric compression; we're all under pressure, and it's crazy making. We've got another 28 years of this, and it peaks at 2012. NOt the end of the world, although it could be. Have we dealt with our inner demons? Do we know if we will project them upon our neighbor, given sufficient stress? Can we look in the mirror, and know we have Israel/Palestine in each one of us? Solutions anyone?

Sorry if I'm rambling, I've got pneumonia, and am on drugs :lol:
question authority?
alwyn
 
Posts: 771
Joined: Tue Jun 03, 2008 7:25 pm
Location: Laytonville
Blog: View Blog (0)

Postby MinM » Sun Feb 08, 2009 11:51 am

Jeff wrote:It's been trending hard that way since the assassination of Rabin.

Rabin's murder is considered irrelevant by many on the left for the same reason as JFK's: both are distractions from structural critique. Kennedy was a Cold Warrior; Rabin was a Zionist. Their deaths are greeted with shrugs. But that's to confuse what promise, even false, the men might have represented to Americans or Vietnamese or Israelis or Palestinians, with what risks they came to pose to criminalized institutions.

Assassination is a tool of fascist statecraft.

IIRC Richard Goodwin, in "Remembering America", laments the fact that there were no logical successors to the Kennedy Bros. A calculation of which tPTB must have counted on when plotting against Yitzhak Rabin.
Image
"...certain people had to take President Kennedy's life in order to control ours..." ~ Mort Sahl
Earth-704509
User avatar
MinM
 
Posts: 3286
Joined: Wed Jun 04, 2008 2:16 pm
Location: Mont Saint-Michel
Blog: View Blog (0)

Postby balehead » Sun Feb 08, 2009 4:39 pm

slimmouse

Not wishing to throw this thread completely off topic, Alice, but how about provably Bullshit religions ?


Hi,
Newbie chiming in here-long time reader, first time poster. But, that is a bit confusing. What is a "provably Bullshit" religion? I mean does that mean, as opposed to religions that are provably not bullshit?

In this day and age, where we rely on science for pretty much everything, I can understand considering all religions bullshit (as I do) or considering them all ok. I just can't see reconciling a fundamentally scientifc concept like "proof" with religion. Since there is nothing empirically "provable" in any of 'em.

They are all bullshit -whether it is Christianity, Islam, Judaism or Hinduism..
Now if someone wants to call it a matter of "faith"-ok whatever ...

But "proof" is not associated with any religion. They are all bullshit. If someone enjoys dabbling in that stuff go for it. But none of it is "provable". Religions and "proof" don't go together.
balehead
 
Posts: 2
Joined: Thu Feb 05, 2009 2:53 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Postby alwyn » Sun Feb 08, 2009 5:11 pm

balehead wrote:
Hi,
Newbie chiming in here-long time reader, first time poster. But, that is a bit confusing. What is a "provably Bullshit" religion? I mean does that mean, as opposed to religions that are provably not bullshit?

In this day and age, where we rely on science for pretty much everything, I can understand considering all religions bullshit (as I do) or considering them all ok. I just can't see reconciling a fundamentally scientifc concept like "proof" with religion. Since there is nothing empirically "provable" in any of 'em.

They are all bullshit -whether it is Christianity, Islam, Judaism or Hinduism..
Now if someone wants to call it a matter of "faith"-ok whatever ...

But "proof" is not associated with any religion. They are all bullshit. If someone enjoys dabbling in that stuff go for it. But none of it is "provable". Religions and "proof" don't go together.


This is a very broad brush you're painting with. I could say that lots of science is bullshit. Thalidomide anyone? Lots of things that were 'scientifically proved' were 'scientifically disproved' later. So, science is just as much a bullshit religion as any of the others that you quoted.

There must be more than bullshit to engage such masses of people, and the quest for the spiritual is something that occurs in every generation, so...

And not to say that there are not piles of bullshit associated with the established religions, just as there are in politics, art,music,science— pick a field and step in a turd.

What would constitute proof? I think that, in order to inspire so many people perennially, the root of the religion must have had a high dose of reality. The branches and fruit may have mutated due to environmental or political factors.

My 2 cents worth.
question authority?
alwyn
 
Posts: 771
Joined: Tue Jun 03, 2008 7:25 pm
Location: Laytonville
Blog: View Blog (0)

That is scary

Postby balehead » Sun Feb 08, 2009 6:39 pm

I could say that lots of science is bullshit. Thalidomide anyone? Lots of things that were 'scientifically proved' were 'scientifically disproved' later. So, science is just as much a bullshit religion as any of the others that you quoted.

There must be more than bullshit to engage such masses of people, and the quest for the spiritual is something that occurs in every generation, so...

And not to say that there are not piles of bullshit associated with the established religions, just as there are in politics, art,music,science— pick a field and step in a turd.

What would constitute proof? I think that, in order to inspire so many people perennially, the root of the religion must have had a high dose of reality. The branches and fruit may have mutated due to environmental or political factors.



This is what is scary about the post-George Bush America. This is the culmination of the project of turning Americans into idiots that the Bush-Palin types have accomplished. That there are so many people in this country, who equate science and fricking religion. That is the thinking of a theocrat.


This is so deeply ignorant and scary. Science does not claim to NEVER get anything wrong-but the thing about science that makes it fundamentally different from religion, arts etc., is that there are objective realities that are empirically measurable and the process is self-correcting.

Americans (most people in the world really- thanks to the preponderance of theocrats in this world) are deeply ignorant about the workings of science. And this is pushed and fostered by the right wing Republican party in this country (and generally conservative groups across the globe). The objective is to foster suspicion of science and scientists and make people even less grounded than they are. There is a reason over 80% of scientists vote Democratic.


Notice how people always like science when it is helping make their lives more comfortable. Eveything we use in our lives that enhances our comfort (and on the flip side many things that are disastrous for the planet) are the result of science and technology.

Yet, when science tells us stuff we don't like "exploiting the environment is bad", "tobacco smoking is bad for your health", then people appeal to all the fringe science being put out by a minority of the scientists
And pull out the "Oh science doesn't always get it right" card.


Science is not about never making mistakes, never having wrong hypotheses, experiments that turn out to be erroneous etc. It is that, it is self-correcting and it is REAL.
Everything you use to enhance your life from the medical technologies that save your life to the computer you use to connect to the internet, is he result of science. Science gets it right a whole lot more than anything else we have.

Religion on the other hand, has some stuff going for it when used well (the philosphical stuff-promoting compassion, selflessness etc. is good stuff and any religion that does that gets kudos for that) , but most of it is poppycock used to control the gullible and the stupid and set them at war against each other.

In a world where not much makes sense, science is an anchoring force. Religion is often what causes so many things in the world to not make sense and they are all pretty much the same in the balance. Which is why, for those of us who don't subscribe to any of them, it is amazing that so many morons go around slaughtering other morons, over minute differences (from any rational view-point) in the theologies of different moronic groups.

That is the funniest thing about theocrats-they hate theocrats of other religions more even than they hate the rest of us, when they probably have more in common with those other theocrats than any reasonable/sane person.

Btw I don't have anything against religious people when they use their religion to become more spiritual/a better person. It is the taking of religion too seriously that I have a problem with. At the end of the day it is make-believe except for the philosophies espoused. When good philosophies are used (again compassion, helping they neighbour etc.) it is a good thing, but when bad philosophies (as is often the case) are promoted, it is one of the most toxic things in the world.
balehead
 
Posts: 2
Joined: Thu Feb 05, 2009 2:53 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: That is scary

Postby alwyn » Sun Feb 08, 2009 7:23 pm

balehead wrote: That there are so many people in this country, who equate science and fricking religion. That is the thinking of a theocrat.


Nope. Definition of theocrat, one who believes in theocracy. Definition of theocracy from Websters:

1 : government of a state by immediate divine guidance or by officials who are regarded as divinely guided 2 : a state governed by a theocracy .

Nothing scientific about it.

Definition of religion, also from Websters.

Main Entry:
re·li·gion Listen to the pronunciation of religion
Pronunciation:
\ri-ˈli-jən\
Function:
noun
Etymology:
Middle English religioun, from Anglo-French religiun, Latin religion-, religio supernatural constraint, sanction, religious practice, perhaps from religare to restrain, tie back — more at rely
Date:
13th century

1 a: the state of a religious <a nun in her 20th year of religion> b (1): the service and worship of God or the supernatural (2): commitment or devotion to religious faith or observance2: a personal set or institutionalized system of religious attitudes, beliefs, and practices3archaic : scrupulous conformity : conscientiousness4: a cause, principle, or system of beliefs held to with ardor and faith

Looking at the last couple of definitions, science could fit in here.:twisted:


This is so deeply ignorant and scary.


Hey, I may be deeply ignorant, but I'm not scary :lol:

Science does not claim to NEVER get anything wrong-but the thing about science that makes it fundamentally different from religion, arts etc., is that there are objective realities that are empirically measurable and the process is self-correcting.


Weeeelll..according to Gurdjieff, there is a spiritual 'objective' reality, and few are capable of comprehending it, scientists included. But that brings me to my point, that true religion is about the experience of that objective reality.

Self correcting denotes something that has a self that is able to observe and correct. Science, by nature, is an activity done by people, so, technically, science is not self correcting. People, however, may correct their scientific processes.

Americans (most people in the world really- thanks to the preponderance of theocrats in this world) are deeply ignorant about the workings of science. And this is pushed and fostered by the right wing Republican party in this country (and generally conservative groups across the globe). The objective is to foster suspicion of science and scientists and make people even less grounded than they are. There is a reason over 80% of scientists vote Democratic.


That might be proof right there that science needs help ;-). I would prefer that they vote green, which is slightly more scientific, and definitely environmental.


Anyway, I don't really disagree with much of your post, and I am nitpicking, but it is Sunday, and it's nice to discuss things here.

ONe of my bones with scientists on a lower level is that they are so fundamentally attached to their reasoning process that they could just as well be fundamentalists, it's just that they have made Reason their God. And they will argue for their points just as forcefully as any religious (or political) fundamentalist.

What I like about the spookier, higher level scientists and theorists is that the division between science and religion gets really thin. I'm thinking Einstein, Fritzoff Capra, a lot of the quantum folks. A lot of the higher level 'religionists' get really scientific. (Look up Ibn Arabi, lots of the medieval Sufis were great scientists AND religionists.) ON a higher level, they are NOT mutually exclusive. They dovetail quite neatly.

There is definitely more in Heaven and Earth than is dreamt of in your philosophy...and that's the beauty of it. Enjoy your day, and thanks for posting. Do more of it :D
question authority?
alwyn
 
Posts: 771
Joined: Tue Jun 03, 2008 7:25 pm
Location: Laytonville
Blog: View Blog (0)

Postby vigilant » Sun Feb 08, 2009 7:54 pm

Very insightful Alwyn, thanks for sharing.
The whole world is a stage...will somebody turn the lights on please?....I have to go bang my head against the wall for a while and assimilate....
vigilant
 
Posts: 2210
Joined: Thu Sep 13, 2007 9:53 pm
Location: Back stage...
Blog: View Blog (0)

Postby AlicetheKurious » Mon Feb 09, 2009 7:54 pm

slimmouse wrote:
AlicetheKurious wrote:
It is very dangerous and wrong to confuse people with states. They are very different. A state is not human: it's a mechanism that people invent and set up, to regulate their interactions and to accomplish certain objectives.



Not wishing to throw this thread completely off topic, Alice, but how about provably Bullshit religions ?


OK, slimmouse, since you haven't clarified what you mean by "provably bullshit religions", I'll answer based on my understanding of your question.

The main concern of religion is the relationship between man and Creator. Since the Creator does not express Him or Herself unambiguously, mankind is left to try to figure out what He or She wants, based on personal interpretation of experience and also on the messages that have come to us via inspirational prophets.

A particular religion is deemed successful when its adherents feel a personal satisfaction with the religion's ability to help them perceive deeper meanings (wisdom), feel inner peace, and a sense of communion with the Creator. By its very nature, it is both subjective and not exactly irrational, but supra-rational.

The main concern of politics is the relationship between people, collectively and individually. It's been described as a social contract, an agreement between individuals, between people and their rulers, and between organized groups within and across national boundaries. In order to function properly in its role as arbiter and regulator, and in order to prevent vigilantism, as well as for purposes of national security, the state usually is granted a monopoly of coercive power, in exchange for the assurance that this will be used in a responsible and impartial way, to protect its citizens. To the extent that the state is perceived as unfair, it becomes more likely that non-state actors will take up arms, eventually leading either to a revolution or chaos.

A particular political system is deemed successful when it provides its citizens with objectively measurable benefits that are re-defined according to changing circumstances. In modern times, these can include equitable distribution of wealth, transparency, equal political and human rights for all citizens, physical security and defense against outside aggression, as well as a peaceful and fair mechanism to effect changes of the political leadership and amendments to the social contract. No less important is the state's ability to "play well with others" as a member of the international community of states.

Above all, politics by its very nature, must be evaluated on objective, pragmatic considerations. That's not to say that morals and ethics don't enter into politics, but here they only make sense within a pragmatic framework that seeks to prevent problems and build stability and security for individual citizens and for the state.

Religion, when limited to its spiritual mission, can help individuals to perceive the divine concealed in the mundane, to glean wisdom from everyday life, and to mentally transcend the limitations imposed by their physical existence. It can be a source of joy, of healing, of inner peace, and provide an exhilarating sense of belonging to something greater than oneself.

Politics, when it sticks to its utilitarian purpose, can allow people to join together to fulfill their common needs far more efficiently and effectively than they could separately.

But once a group driven by the subjective, non-rational interpretation that is characteristic of religion are allowed to take over the coercive power of a state, we have a big mess.
"If you're not careful the newspapers will have you hating the oppressed and loving the people doing the oppressing." - Malcolm X
User avatar
AlicetheKurious
 
Posts: 5348
Joined: Thu Nov 30, 2006 11:20 am
Location: Egypt
Blog: View Blog (0)

Postby slimmouse » Mon Feb 09, 2009 8:19 pm

AlicetheKurious wrote:Religion, when limited to its spiritual mission, can help individuals to perceive the divine concealed in the mundane, to glean wisdom from everyday life, and to mentally transcend the limitations imposed by their physical existence. It can be a source of joy, of healing, of inner peace, and provide an exhilarating sense of belonging to something greater than oneself.


OK Alice I'll bite.

Since when has the Abrahimic faiths, based upon what intelligent scholars can see are a clear collection of lies, ever been anything else other than a bunch of fucking crap - used almost exclusively for political purposes at the expense of humanity as a whole ?

Talking about spirituality and the Abrahimic faiths in the same sentence is about as big an oxymoron as you can get IMHO.

And the situation in Gaza is (but one) of the results.
slimmouse
 
Posts: 6129
Joined: Fri May 20, 2005 7:41 am
Location: Just outside of you.
Blog: View Blog (3)

Postby OP ED » Mon Feb 09, 2009 9:31 pm

slimmouse wrote:

Since when has the Abrahimic faiths, based upon what intelligent scholars can see are a clear collection of lies, ever been anything else other than a bunch of fucking crap - used almost exclusively for political purposes at the expense of humanity as a whole ?



MLKJ.
User avatar
OP ED
 
Posts: 4673
Joined: Sat Jan 05, 2008 10:04 pm
Location: Detroit
Blog: View Blog (0)

Postby unaltered » Mon Feb 09, 2009 9:37 pm

based upon what intelligent scholars can see are a clear collection of lies


I am non-religious; a non-believer in all religions and anti-religions.

Still, your statement is false; lots of intelligent scholars are believers or are non-believers who don't believe it is all "lies." Intelligence transcends belief/non-belief.
unaltered
 
Posts: 345
Joined: Sun Mar 09, 2008 9:55 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Postby orz » Mon Feb 09, 2009 10:00 pm


This is a very broad brush you're painting with. I could say that lots of science is bullshit. Thalidomide anyone? Lots of things that were 'scientifically proved' were 'scientifically disproved' later. So, science is just as much a bullshit religion as any of the others that you quoted.


DUURRR SCIENCE IS JUST ANOTHER RELIGION MAYUBE THE ANSWR IS SOMEWHERE IN THE MIDDDLE LOL

Can someone PLEASE post SOMETHING on this board which i couldn't come up with word for word from the thread title????!??!? :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry:
orz
 
Posts: 4107
Joined: Sun Oct 02, 2005 9:25 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Postby alwyn » Tue Feb 10, 2009 12:03 am

orz wrote:DUURRR SCIENCE IS JUST ANOTHER RELIGION MAYUBE THE ANSWR IS SOMEWHERE IN THE MIDDDLE LOL

Can someone PLEASE post SOMETHING on this board which i couldn't come up with word for word from the thread title????!??!? :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry:



maybe we need your fine example. Give us an example, and we'll try to emulate it. :roll:

on edit, sorry, don't mean to be snarky, still got lung problems, I'm sure it's affecting my brain. I'm trying to parse your sentence and come up with sense, and just can't. Would you care to elucidate? :D
question authority?
alwyn
 
Posts: 771
Joined: Tue Jun 03, 2008 7:25 pm
Location: Laytonville
Blog: View Blog (0)

PreviousNext

Return to General Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 41 guests