'Night Flight reprise', from the self-produced album, Blue Jazz.
edsBackalleyBand on Youtube
composed, produced, by, ed

Rachel Dolezal, Black by Association



US race activist Rachel Dolezal has said "I identify as black", despite claims that she is actually white.
On Monday, Ms Dolezal resigned from the anti-racism organisation NAACP, after her parents said she was pretending to be black.
Speaking to NBC, she said that from the age of five she "was drawing self-portraits with the brown crayon instead of the peach crayon".
She added that she "takes exception" to suggestions she had deceived people. - bbc

If you think about it, racial identity is related to ASSOCIATED identity. In other words, it is perceived association with a particular race that leads one to possibly become more open to the legacy, culture, etc, of the race.

Association can either be direct (as in ancestry) or adopted (as in 'being black' even if one is not). In either case, the degree of association (identification, adoption, openness, valuing related culture, etc) determines one's race.  (Imagine a white boy adopted by a black family or a Chinese child brought up in India by an Indian family.)




Of course, there may be some genetic legacies that are passed on via direct association via ancestry. However, so long as this is not the only means for racial/cultural transmission, racial identity is pretty much open to cross-racial adoption.
At the very least, one can take on a race culturally, if not via biological ancestry - races can today be classified as 'cultural race', 'ethnic race', and 'national race', with some overlaps.  There can also be 'cross-time races' where a person might identify with people from a previous time.

At the very least, one can take on a race culturally, if not via biological ancestry - races can today be classified as 'cultural race', 'ethnic race', and 'national race', with some overlaps.  There can also be 'cross-time races' where a person might identify with people from a previous time. 

I really don't see what the fuss is over Rachel's 'pretense' of 'being black' when we are assailed by people sporting Marvel heroes t-shirts and 'cosplaying' as spiderman to Pokemon, or some 'Guitar Hero' or lame western Pop-Star these days.  And i don't see any fuss over the millions of non-white people pretending to be white by mindlessly following every pathetic pop and fashion trend that comes from the west.  They may not claim to 'be white', but they are certainly doing so in every other way.

 


Another interesting situation is where people may identify themselves as, say, English, but when their own ancestors of, say, the 1940s or 1950s were to take a time machine trip to the present, they might not be able to identify with them at all, or vice versa.  So these claims of being of this race of that is pretty much superfluous. 

I really don't see what the fuss is over Rachel's 'pretense' of 'being black' when we are assailed by people sporting Marvel heroes t-shirts and 'cosplaying' as Spiderman to Pokemon, or some 'Guitar Hero' or lame western Pop-Star these days.

I suppose i can identify with Rachel because, back in the 80s, when i was in my teens, i went to my parents one evening and pronounced, 'I'm not an Indian anymore'.  I continued, 'in a world full of different cultures, why should i just be one race?  It's so boring!  I want to take on various parts of various cultures and races.  That way, i can experience things from more angles and appreciate more of life."  My father looked at my mother and asked in Tamil, 'Why is he saying this", and my mother responded in Tamil, "Why not?  He can be anything he wants to be."  And my father just smiled.  Being of different races or cultures is like taking one different sensory faculties.  Imagine one race having the sense of smell, another of taste, etc, etc.  Become one with them all, and you get to sense more than each one of them.

Being of different races or cultures is like taking one different sensory faculties.  Imagine one race having the sense of smell, another of taste, etc, etc.  Become one with them all, and you get to sense more than each one of them.

That said, if race, or cultural race, can be so malleable, the rhetoric of nationalism can be tossed in the bin, and people can finally cease wondering why some of their national compatriots might empathise with their brethren in other cultural or regional climes and even empathise with them to militant proportions.


After all, if we can become militant in our own national defense, we cannot deny those who empathise with other nationals the selfsame right, since their perception of oneness is not bound by the illusory borders of the nation-state.




That done, now, the only thing left to figure out is how to pronounce her surname.


ed

On ‘terror apologists‘ and ‘being British’



"Apologists" for those who commit acts of terrorism are partly responsible for the violence, Philip Hammond has said. - bbc




Flipmode (211 likes): This just goes to prove these apologists will never agree to our way of life, so why are they here?

It always the same religious group blaming everyone else for the barbaric acts that THEIR people carry out.

Yet , they only ever speak out when they feel like it, you don’t hear a word about the beheadings,child abuse etc etc,

They seem to except that as the norm.

Alan (171 likes) : Who is to blame that Emwazi did not think the he belonged in the UK ONLY Emwazi. ALL those from ethnic minorities, especially those from Middlee East, Pakistan and Bangladesh, must embrace british culture.

Keep their religion but discard all the closed community culture.


Aphoristic (1 like): Again all the most accurate views today are the "lowest rated"...
It's a bit of a right wing Daily Hate sleaze fest on HYS today....
Was there an IS before we invaded other countries? NO! The West created the conditions which gave birth to IS, Al Qaeda.
So we're supposed to forget and/or deny this now are we? "Ministry of Truth" in action.
Saddam, Gaddafi etc evil but were were preventing this!!


Donkzilla (1 like): UK security services made Jihadi John the nutter he is today. Same story with ISIS. Blair and the BBC supported US lies about Saddam's weapons of mass destruction because Saddam was selling oil in euros instead of dollars. Those lies and the invasion of Iraq helped make ISIS. Now we're being spoon fed lies about Russia because Russia is selling oil and gas in euros.

Watch the truth get censored!

Ed (1 like): So a person who talks about how the HIV virus spreads is a 'HIV apologist' or 'HIV sympathiser' i suppose.

So long as we acknowledge that every effect has a cause, than we cannot but wonder after western contribution to the rise of 'terror'. Plugging the holes require identifying them. That doesn't mean i caused them. Get objective.  People are more focused on the horrendous means by which ‘Jihadi John’ (Emwazi) plys his trade ( I personally think it grossly psychotic and baulk at even picturing what he did.  Insane how one human can do this to another.), and not on the more quantitative killings perpetrated by the west albeit via less horrendous means (but is relatively ‘alright’ and ‘worth the price’ because no necks are being sliced.  This, however, it appears, can give rise to the kind of psychosis as exhibited by Emwazi, )

What we are seeing is the colonial racist mentality in new forms.  They used to term as ‘savages’ those whom resisted the colonial musket with a spear.


*

It’s clear that we have reached the Inquisition stage of the current version of modernity in ideology dominance and reinforcement.


At the end of the day, those people who go to join Islamic militants do so because they have yet to buy into the double standards of the British in how the British treat those within the UK, the US, and the EU, as opposed to those without.  

In other words, a few thousand americans killed during 11/9 = bad and deserves retalition.  But half a million children killed via embargoes in Iraq by Britain and the US via the UN Sanctions committee = worth the price (words by Madeline Albright, the US ambassador to the UN). 

So what is ‘being British’?  Having one standard for those within and another for those without?  Thinking that we have the right to retaliate when they kill a thousand of us, but those who retaliate when we kill a 100,000 of theirs are ‘terrorists’?  Not bothering about what our popularly installed governments do to others so long as they don’t do the same to us?  If that is ‘British’, then my problem is I’m more objective, egalitarian, and empathetic than ‘British’.

It’s clear that we have reached the Inquisition stage of the current version of modernity in ideology dominance and reinforcement. 

In brief - and despite what western intellectuals have to say about the ‘modern’ phenomenon - modernity is where we have reached a high point of a particular type of civilisation where a particular ideology or/and region dominates.  At this point, consequences emerge as resistance to it, i.e., in present times, ‘terrorism’, crime, etc. 

That is when the Inquisition stage comes into being where efforts are made to not only put it down, but to deny anyone the right to objectively and scientifically scrutinise, understand, and explain it lest the dominant powers are made to look bad.  History, facts, figures,  a scientific and objective analysis of it, etc, are all denied as the dominant powers strive to position themselves as without contributory sin or culpability so that their agenda, dominance, and supremacy can continue with impunity.



Let those who didn’t contribute to the emergence of the evil within another cast the first stone.


ed


The west and Indian culture



"Look girl, either you can focus on guys in college or on studies" - just one of the unusual conversations heard in a women-only carriage” - bbc

following extracted from BBC Facebook

Diane Knight: Can’t you have both!!!!???

Leon Gabriel Kharkongor: Different parts of India have different mentalities. Delhi does not represent the whole of India.

Gerard Takiwa: Well done BBC ... For telling India...to step out of the dark and embrace the light !

Sharmaine Mohan: Indians embrace light almost 10000 yrs ago buddy...Educate yourself before making stupid comments....

Ed: You can't blame Gerard too much Sharmaine. Gerard, after all, is product of his western media, unlike us, who pay attention to everything that goes on everywhere.

Hence, we are endowed with more perspectives, whereas they don't know anything other than Hollywood and their own culture of drinking, eating, walking dogs, worshipping celebs and footballers.

Prashanti R: Well said edwin

Lakha Singh: More than 200 country in the world why BBC run behind the india


*



ed: That just means they don't want any distractions. If the BBC and the whites have their way, all  students in universities all around the world will mirror American Pie.

They call it freedom. But there is another sort of freedom. That is, to be better. That requires one to curtail one's own freedom to be worse than one can be. Whites don't have the cultural input in their own clime to understand this.   For them, freedom is the right to be as bad as one can legally be.  For Indians, and others, freedom is partaking in that which makes on more than one’s primitive selves.

They see the above aspect of Indian culture as something to ridicule or 'backward'. But that just betrays their belief that they are the centre of human civilisation and perpetuates the colonial white-is-right myth. The colonial spirit lingers on in new forms doesn't it.

Let's educate them to alternatives to Porky and American Pie.  You can start with the comment made on the women-only carriage.  It is not something odd or ‘unusual’ as the BBC presents.  It is something quite enlightening.  That is, if you can think beyond the whites of your eyes.

*




If the BBC are so interested to know about Indian culture, why just pick those instances that might be of interest to the whites instead of that which is of interest to the Indians?

Basically, the Indians amongst other non-whites, are only of interest where it caters to their interests. Much is to be learnt, and can be educational to the whites, if they focus, also, on that which currently is not of interest to them, or which they have never considered in their relatively narrow cultural milieu.

The Whites need to get out more. There is more to the potential of the human being than their culture highlights.



ed




Quip: Monkey Goes on First Date



From that look, it looks like after a year of marriage, not  during a first date.




Toward a non-European Socialist Vision




We need to distinguish between EuroSocialism and Socialism. In Eurosocialism, there is an avowed belief that culture is formed by economic development. Whilst that is in part true, we have to realise that culture is not thoroughly formed in the west as it might in other parts of the world like India and China.

European socialism is more 'technical'.  It deals with the body, not the mind or spirit.

However, when these 'techniques' are infused with the eastern spirit of profound and spiritual passion and vigour, or humility in the face of Gods that remind us that no matter how perfect we think we are, our thinking is far from perfect,
it can add that modicum of spirit to the entire scheme of things that can make it go even further than can be imagined by the technically-inclined and Marx-abiding European Socialist.


In these parts, culture, rather than 'being formed' by economic development, can instead be used to interpret economic development or even challenge it, like Buddhism did more than 2000 years ago in the face of the growth of the capitalist tendency in parts of India.

One could even state plausibly that Buddhism was the world's first Socialist movement. Even Japan had to get rid of Buddhism in its efforts to westernise and 'capitalise' itself in the face of western colonial imperialism. That is why many Buddhist temples were burnt down and monks incarcerated, and the relatively value-free Shintoism brought in as the state religion. European socialist intellectuals have ignored all these facts in their development of socialism, and which explains, in part, why socialism has largely failed in the south-east.

Secondly, Eurosocialism is, in part, a legacy of western colonial imperialism, in that European socialists tend to position themselves at the helm of global socialist perspectival development. They do not take on board contradictory views from non-Europeans and expect the global socialist body to take their cue from European socialist intellectuals.

The problem with European socialist intellectuals, including Marx, is that they do not consider how culture can be used to, complement, reinforce, and flower the development of the socialist tendency in other parts of the world. To discard culture as just an elitist legacy betrays their ignorance of the fact that in many parts of the world, culture can be a product of a people despite elitism. It is, in other words, a culture formed from the ground up - India is a prime example.

A turn of a clockwork key might be sufficient to propel a mechanical mouse, but it is not enough to motivate the human spirit.

Hence, to just abide by the dictates of the Europeans in socialist development is to ignore the fact that culture forms an integral part of non-European societies, and that to shrug it off leads to losing the incorporation of many to the socialist cause.  A turn of a clockwork key might be sufficient to propel a mechanical mouse, but it is not enough to motivate the human spirit.


Marx made sense in lots of things, but there is much that he couldn't understand. He, in fact, used the European model of historical development as the model for understanding the development of world history. Whilst he might have gotten his observable facts correct - i.e. feudal societies, monarchism, etc - the MEANING of these facts is variable according to various cultures and climes.

What we need is the production of socialists who include their own cultural knowledge and histories in the development of socialist traditions that can actually deliver results in their particular cultural climes whilst exorcising it off those elite-supporting elements that compromise its socialist spirit. To discard their cultures is to discard the people. And where would socialism be in those countries without the people?

Asian socialism, when it successfully breaks away from the perspectival hegemony of European socialists, can be a far more vibrant and profound movement when they incorporate their own religious and social philosophies, whether it be from the rich philosophies of the Chinese during the period known as 'A Hundred Schools of Thought' before the ascension of Qin Shih Huang Ti in 221 b.c. or the philosophies of the many Indian sages and religious and Vedic traditions that go back thousands of years.

European socialism is more 'technical'.  It deals with the body, not the mind or spirit. However, when these 'techniques' are infused with the eastern spirit of profound and spiritual passion and vigour, or humility in the face of Gods that remind us that no matter how perfect we think we are, our thinking is far from perfect, it can add that modicum of spirit to the entire scheme of things that can make it go even further than can be imagined by the technically-inclined and Marx-abiding European Socialist.

We need the rise of Hindu Socialism, Buddhist Socialism, Jain Socialism, Taoist Socialism, Aboriginal, African, amongst others, and the fusion of these to form a Socialism that includes not only the political and economic infrastructure - as European socialists talk about - but the Human Atman (soul) (Hindu, that refers to transcending material reality and historical circumstance to identify our true selves via self-knowledge) and Ren (Confucian, referring to the good feelings engendered when being altruistic).


OM



Chelsea fans racist rant in Paris, Colonialism, and Football




Yero: and whats wrong? he is black he should be in AFRICA not in fckin EUROPE!!!!!! EUROPE FOR EUROPEANS

Ed:  And why did you go and colonise and rob other lands for hundreds of years eh?  You should have stayed in your own country and fed off your Queen's table right.  Now that they've fed your economy for a long time through your pillaging colonialism, they are, in effect, investors and shareholders in 'your' country.

You think the Europeans gave as much to you English pirates?  No.  It was the Black man, the Indians, etc, etc.  Europe for Europeans my beautiful brown ass.  That's why the formation of the EU was racist.  You gained off the non-Europeans, and then you close it off to them and say, 'Europe for Europeans'.  How many so called 'non-racist English or Europeans even realise that?  And the rest of the world want to take their cultural and perspectival cue from them.  The world should wake up.

Go get some commonsense you dumb prick.

*



Clasifi 1: You can't eradicate racism because it's part of human nature.

Ed: Being fearful of difference and the unfamiliar might be a part of human nature.  But overcoming one's fears is also part of human nature, and can be seen as human nature REALISED.

Would you say that being ignorant is part of human nature, whilst getting rid of said ignorance isn't?  You could say that thinking like yourself would be sub-human, or a human nature that is yet to be realised. 

Go think some more.

Being fearful of difference and the unfamiliar might be a part of human nature.  But overcoming one's fears is also part of human nature, and can be seen as human nature REALISED.


*

When people say 'there is no place for racism in football', i can't stop smiling, condescendingly.
Football is an ultra-right wing pastime that promotes nationalism, patriotism, and territorialism. So, whether it be in the face of foreigners elsewhere, or within the homeground, or immigrants, or supporters of another team, we have an aggressive US vs THEM mentality.  So it is no wonder that the EDL (English Defence League) was formed from football supporters.

This can be said about all sports. However, the difference is, in football, we have a whole team, an 'army', being aggressive with another, and trying to gain at the expense of another. And hence, there would be close identification between a 'group' of supporters and the team 'group' as well. In tennis, golf, running, etc, it is a singular activity, and therefore, the group of supporters will not be able to as closely identify with the runners/etc as they might with a whole team.

That's one of the reason why i don't fancy soccer, or football. Too right-wing for my taste. But one of the reason why football is so popular in England is because the English don't have much of a culture via which they can express passion, intelligence, etc, and hence, football becomes a means via which they can do so. They might say it is their 'culture', but the ed meister says, "that is what you do to compensate for not having one."


ed


What variations of Ereaders teach us about new-style Corporate Scams






Actually, the features of the Aura HD should have been included in the Kobo Glo as an upgrade to the Kobo Glo. 

What all these corporations are doing these days is simply maintaining the first product as it is, maintaining its price or close to it, so as to justify a higher price for another 'premium' model instead of putting these ‘premium’ features into the original product.

What all these corporations are doing these days is simply maintaining the first product as it is, maintaining its price or close to it, so as to justify a higher price for another 'premium' model

If you think about it, these corporations say that the price of new tech is expensive because it is new.  But over time, with innovations, the cost of producing old tech (such as the Kobo Glo) should drop significantly.  That is when new technology, such as that which is included in the Kobo Aura HD, if included as an upgrade to the newer models of the Kobo Glo, should maintain the price of the Kobo Glo at its original price. 



For instance, if when the Kobo Glo first came out, it was, say, $100. Then, over time, with the production of new innovations as seen in the Kobo Aura HD, the price of the Kobo Glo should drop to, say $30-$50.  That is when the innovations in the Kobo Aura HD can be stuck into the Kobo Glo and the price for it maintained at $100.  So there is no need for a Kobo Aura HD. 



When I first bought my Honda PCX 2013 model, it didn’t have features that the following year’s model had.  Did Honda produce a 2014 model and call it, say, Honda PCX Aura, and give people the ‘choice’ of two models in 2014 - one with the 2013 features and the PCX Aura with the 2014 features?  No.  These features were added on to the 2014 PCX model and the prices maintained as in the previous year though you were getting more features (which should have been included in the 2013 model actually, since the technology was already around for some years!).  Same thing applies in the case of the Kobo and all other e-readers out there.  And if you think about it, much of the innovations for just about any type of product out there.

It seems, that to 'keep up with the times' comes with it an inbuilt prerequisite  of becoming more stupid with the passage of time.

This is a global scam, but most don't put much thought to this, and hence, fall victim to this new corporate ploy to get more money out of the people.  Now, what we have to fear are not the corporations, but the people who are so gullible and easily trained to accept far less for much more. 
Those few of us on the planet who realise these things, unfortunately, have to suffer along with the rest who think there isn’t a problem.  And the young, who know no better for want of historical knowledge, will take to it as a duck does to water. 

Knowledge, and wisdom, is indeed sorrow.  It seems, that to 'keep up with the times' comes with it an inbuilt prerequisite of becoming more stupid with the passage of time.  Like I've said before, the term 'piracy' is too narrowly applied, and in the favour of the 'legitimate' pirates of our times.



ed





Je suis Charlie et Muhammad





I'm Catholic, but This is not about the freedom of speech. It's about the freedom to be a right-wing, self-absorbed, Eurocentric, ass****.

For myself, i'm Charlie and Muhammad. Mutual respect and love please.

And let's not decontextualise this situation. The cartoons are just the cherry on a cake of historical western colonial abuse of the non-western netherworld.

The cartoons are an insult in addition to a long-standing injury afflicted on the Arab/Islamic world. I'm not saying that the attacks are right. Certainly not. However, when you keep injuring another, we cannot be shocked when we are slapped back.

I'm explaining it, not justifying it, by the way.

*

Free speech. Interesting topic. Free speech as a child; or free speech as an adult; or free speech as an empathetic, thoughtful human being?

I'm for the lattermost of the three. Of course, freedom of speech is curtailed when i choose the third. Because then i can't rant like a child, or just be biased in my expressions like most adults. It imposes upon me the need to really think, research, consider, listen, empathise, and go beyond my own familiarised cultural norms to consider the aspects of other cultures to discern deficiencies in my own. But isn't that when free speech matures my vocal chords to my mind to the max? 

What brand of 'free speech' is the west promoting via their support of Charlie Hebdo's brand of childish 'free speech'? (watch attached video) I join with the west in condemning the shootings, but that doesn't make what CH did right.

I was shocked when they came up with their grossly insulting cartoons of Muhammad (not all were insulting though). I'm not a Muslim. I'm Catholic. But it still shocked me. They were just far right-wingers disguised as champions of free speech. Now, with this horrendous massacre of their staff, they are being hailed as heroes?

Your shooting me because of the nonsense i spewed doesn't make said nonsense Holy Writ.

And finally, let's not forget that Charlie Hebdo's cartoons should be taken in the context of the west's activities in the middle east for more than a hundred years, Palestine, installation and support of tyrannical regimes, murderous embargoes and so on. Charlie Hebdo's cartoons in themselves do not deserve such a murderous reaction, but when we take the whole context into account, then we can began to understand it, if not condone it. This is a simple and simplified explanation, not a justification of the attacks.


*

It's kind of pathetic. Everyone, including myself, when criticising Charlie Hebdo for what they did, feel the need to state that we aren't condoning the violence of the gunmen. Looks like the freedom of expression in the west is paired with an unstated realisation that we aren't free to argue any oppositional case without being accused of being a terrorist supporter.

For myself, 'terrorism' is violence for political ends. In that, the Islamic 'terrorists' do not hold a monopoly on being referred to as such.'

It is not the Arabs/Muslims/Islamists whom have colonised the west during the colonial period. It is not the Arabs who gave Palestine to the Israelis and armed them to expel the Palestinians. It is not the Arabs who have been installing one tyrannical regime after another in the west for their own ends. It is not the Arabs who imposed embargoes on the US that killed half a million American children. It is not....etc, etc, etc, etc, etc, etc....

So when we take this into account, it is nothing but gross hypocrisy bordering on Eurocentric self-centred psychosis to call these people terrorists if we do not look into what we have done ourselves. And it is downright juvenile to think that all of this does not serve as the basis upon which these terrorists reacted the way they did to Charlie Hebdo's insulting images of Muhammad. The spark can produce nothing without the aid of existing fuel emanating from the west.


*

Not illustrating Muhammad indicates the expression and ability to feel a particular kind of profound and deep respect which I, and many others, are not accustomed to experiencing. A different and profound kind of feeling.
I'd like to respect that as a prelude to learning to feel the same way too. Who knows what sort of new profound feelings and views that can engender.
There are more facets to perceptive and perspectival reality that imaginable by the western mind alone you know.

*

Muslims have a problem with drawn or any depictions of their Prophet or Allah. I suppose it is a sign of great respect.
I'm willing to respect it, and am interested to acquire the perspective from which such respect emerges as it indicates another way of looking at things. I think it means more than i've described.
So wondrous a creation, the more perspectives, and of greater or variable vantages to appreciate it, the better.

*

Satire, cartoons .... this is the west's attempt to understand things when they don't want to spare an issue more thought than a child might do a cartoon.

*



*

Maureen:
No to racism, Islamophobia, and scapegoating


Scott: Easy to say if it is not your loved ones that have been butchered.



Ed: If we study the cause-effect contributory factors for the last century and this, we'll be faced with the fact that it takes two hands to clap. It's all too easy and self-serving to just look at this tragedy and view it simply as the pen versus the sword.

We need to take the wider context into account in determining accountability, and then take progressive steps towards dismantling terrorism, on BOTH sides. Progressive steps, to resolve this problem once and for all, means something else when it's starting point is based on self-centredness.

Paul: Easy to say its simply a matter of free speech if 1,000,000 muslims in Iraq hadn't been butchered by the 'western democracies' or the CIA with the compliance of the British state hadn't kidnapped, held in 'dark sites' and tortured god knows how many muslims - and whipped up a racist fever not seen since the 1930's whereby women in France are prosecuted for wearing the hijab, where demostrations in favour of Palestinians are banned and leading politicians say muslims are a 'fifth column'. George Galloway always said the illegal attack on Iraq would have terrible consequences and he was right. Racists are now using the shocking events to whip up more race hatred. I'm against them.

Scott: Few want racism or segregation, most want free speech (certainly in Western cultures) it is too easy to use such tragedies to push forward political agendas from any side of the political spectrum. Iraq (2nd time) appears to be a dreadfull mistake but it would be foolish to believe these attacks are purely a reaction to past events. There is a monster (disguising itself behind religion) trying to gain hearts and minds, little different to the far right, in its desire for conforming and controlling of world power. So perhaps solidarity for all those that desire peace is required, and for now a great deal of sympathy for those that have been lost. I don't suppose the self-serving Mr Galloway will waste much time or tears.


Ed: Let's put it this way. If all the past atrocities against Muslims didn't take place, what are the chances of this event against CH taking place?

To understand the west's perspectival stance against terrorists, and its very definition of it, knowing the perspectives that ruled the colonialists for the past few hundred years would help. It is only then that we can begin to understand how little we have changed despite all claims to the contrary.

As for the 'monster' of religion 'trying to gain hearts and minds'. This appears to be a clash between people of two different consciousness of universal brotherhood. One, makes a religion out of the state to determine who is a brother, and the other recognises ones brother on the basis of religious similitude even if he hails from beyond the illusory borders of the state.

I want peace and universal brotherhood, but we need to engage on more than a fair bit of critical introspection in order to bring it about.


Scott: It is possible to go back hundreds and thousands of years from any political perspective to find greviences that somehow give violent extremist the opportunity to take 'revenge' on political powers that they envy and dispise. This is not about Muslims as such or past disputes, it is the same story of ambitious individuals looking for a way to gain power and dominace.

It is too easy to throw stones at the west and dig up the past, the west generally does the best it can in a ruthless, complicated and disjointed world. Simple ideologies, rational argument and rheteric will never solve these problems as the opportunity to use violence to gain status and power undeserved without political process is too great an opportunity to miss. Those carrying out these acts are often ignorant, naive or have even been threatened or forcibly made to be the tools of those that are truly evil.

Honestly 'Universal Brotherhood' this will never exist due to greed and ambition, religion is just a tool used to advance these aims.

'Critical Intropection' will not stop extremists, it is actually pretty patronizing for individuals to take the moral high ground and have no practical means to solve these problems. We shoud be thankful for the bravery of our troops, the vigilance of our security forces and the resolve of our politicians.

Britain is by no means perfect or innocent but it does at least allow our discussions to take place.


Cliff: It is interesting that people do not want things from the past brought into a discussion about today's events but I am sure they would be quite upset if, for instance, inheritance from the past was cancelled out to! So for example the Royal Family can quite happily keep their castles and lands but never want to discuss the atrocities that brought them into their family possession in the first place.


Ed: We're not talkiing about hundreds of thousands of years. We are talking about continuity from the past 100 years TO the present. Using your logic, we could also say let's forget about the past and treat this as an isolated incident, and not link it to the islamic militancy before and after 11/9, and including 11/9 itself right. This militancy has continuity as well, and can be linked to in cause-effect terms to all that's been going on since colonial times to the present.

No doubt, given any situation such as this, there will be groups and people who will be jostling each other for power. But we need to look at the underlying causes for these events so that they are not repeated in the future.

The west has laid the foundations for much of these evils today. I suppose you think nothing of the west's genocidal activities in the world from colonial times to the present. Millions upon millions died being forced to feed 'King/Queen and country' throughout the globe, the indigenous population of Tasmania was decimated, along with the population of the Australia and the USA, slavery, forced growth of cash crops, carving up of regions for western self-interests both economic and political.

Self-serving to say this is all in the past when the consequences visit us on a daily basis. The middle-east is part of the ongoing story. And if the past is to be discounted because it is in the past, then why all the fuss over Remembrance Day? It is a usual psychological strategy for people to assign to the discountable 'past' so as to decontextualise current events that affect us. Why? So that our own contribution to these evil state of affairs can be ignored and the 'bad men' in the present can just be shrugged off as insane mad men who do what they do simply because they insane mad men.


Je suis Charlie et Muhammad


ed



Blogger Template by Clairvo