UKIP
- Nikolas Vitus Lagartija
- Overbomber
- Posts: 2485
- Joined: 04 Aug 2011, 23:35
- Location: Scotland
- Contact:
Whatever happened to the spirit of "Sisters gegen Nazis" ??
- markfiend
- goriller of form 3b
- Posts: 21181
- Joined: 11 Nov 2003, 10:55
- Location: st custards
- Contact:
Well said.Nikolas Vitus Lagartija wrote:Whatever happened to the spirit of "Sisters gegen Nazis" ??
The fundamental cause of the trouble is that in the modern world the stupid are cocksure while the intelligent are full of doubt.
—Bertrand Russell
—Bertrand Russell
that just corssed my mind going through yet another flame-war topic. (not that i'm not a one that poured gas on that fire)
- EvilBastard
- Overbomber
- Posts: 3934
- Joined: 01 Feb 2006, 17:48
- Location: Where the Ruined Tower shouts
That's an easy one to answer. Diversity within the genetic pool means that groups are less susceptible to disease and the consequences of interbreeding - the incidence of tay-sachs within the Ashkenazi jewish population is a clear example of what happens when your genetic pool is too small.sultan2075 wrote:"Diversity is strength" is very much a cliche used by very well-meaning people. So tell me: how is it a strength? What makes it a strength? I am genuinely curious.eastmidswhizzkid wrote: 3. the countless races who have made the uk their home since the dawn of time are the reason we survive as a hopelessy "mongrel" nation. that cultural and genetic diversity is our strenghth. the reality of racial "purity" is the reason why pedigree bulldogs can hardly breathe, let alone catch a cow...and also why it is ill-advised to fuck your sister.
.
Cultural diversity also provides a range of experiences and knowledge that can be deployed in problem-solving - if all you've got's a hammer, then everything looks like a nail, but when you've got a complete set of tools then your ability to create more things is greatly enhanced. Cultural diversity also allows people from one ethnic group to experience food, music, art, film, associated with another, which is believed to enhance quality of life. Happy people are generally more economically productive, live longer, and thereby generally contribute more to the tax base - countries with low life expectancy are generally less economically advantaged, the two are linked.
"I won't go down in history, but I probably will go down on your sister."
Hank Moody
Hank Moody
Policies aside, the Ukip are so utterly shambolic. The left hand doesn't even seem to know what the right hand is doing.
They have already admitted that they don't even bother turning up for important votes, despite being elected & paid to do a job.
Would you employ (& pay) anyone who simply couldn't be bothered to work?
The interview on LBC the other day is another example.
Farage's own advisor couldn't even stop him digging a hole for himself.
A recent comment I read summed them up perfectly I think.
They have already admitted that they don't even bother turning up for important votes, despite being elected & paid to do a job.
Would you employ (& pay) anyone who simply couldn't be bothered to work?
The interview on LBC the other day is another example.
Farage's own advisor couldn't even stop him digging a hole for himself.
A recent comment I read summed them up perfectly I think.
So regardless of their message (which I am vehemently against) it strikes me that any votes they do actually get would be a total waste.Can't organise a steel band at a carnival is the new 'p*ss up in a brewery'.
- Nikolas Vitus Lagartija
- Overbomber
- Posts: 2485
- Joined: 04 Aug 2011, 23:35
- Location: Scotland
- Contact:
Totally agree. They are the political equivalent of turning up at a TSOM gig wearing a "The Sisters Suck" t-shirt then spending all evening in the venue bar.Pista wrote:Policies aside, the Ukip are so utterly shambolic.
A recent comment I read summed them up perfectly I think.So regardless of their message (which I am vehemently against) it strikes me that any votes they do actually get would be a total waste.Can't organise a steel band at a carnival is the new 'p*ss up in a brewery'.
- itnAklipse
- Slight Overbomber
- Posts: 1541
- Joined: 09 Jun 2003, 08:12
- Location: set adrift
- Contact:
Oh God, political debate reduced to slogans like 'diversity is strength'. i'm not even going to bother with this brainless BS anymore.
we've got beer and we've got fuel
- sultan2075
- Overbomber
- Posts: 2379
- Joined: 04 Mar 2005, 19:17
- Location: Washington, D. C.
- Contact:
What do you do when cultures have radically different and incompatible conceptions of good and evil?EvilBastard wrote:That's an easy one to answer. Diversity within the genetic pool means that groups are less susceptible to disease and the consequences of interbreeding - the incidence of tay-sachs within the Ashkenazi jewish population is a clear example of what happens when your genetic pool is too small.sultan2075 wrote:"Diversity is strength" is very much a cliche used by very well-meaning people. So tell me: how is it a strength? What makes it a strength? I am genuinely curious.eastmidswhizzkid wrote: 3. the countless races who have made the uk their home since the dawn of time are the reason we survive as a hopelessy "mongrel" nation. that cultural and genetic diversity is our strenghth. the reality of racial "purity" is the reason why pedigree bulldogs can hardly breathe, let alone catch a cow...and also why it is ill-advised to fuck your sister.
.
Cultural diversity also provides a range of experiences and knowledge that can be deployed in problem-solving - if all you've got's a hammer, then everything looks like a nail, but when you've got a complete set of tools then your ability to create more things is greatly enhanced. Cultural diversity also allows people from one ethnic group to experience food, music, art, film, associated with another, which is believed to enhance quality of life. Happy people are generally more economically productive, live longer, and thereby generally contribute more to the tax base - countries with low life expectancy are generally less economically advantaged, the two are linked.
Also, are the bolded things "culture"? Does cultural diversity just mean we have sushi for lunch every once in a while and occasionally watch Bollywood movies?
--
The most successful tyranny is not the one that uses force to assure uniformity but the one that removes the awareness of other possibilities, that makes it seem inconceivable that other ways are viable, that removes the sense that there is an outside.
The most successful tyranny is not the one that uses force to assure uniformity but the one that removes the awareness of other possibilities, that makes it seem inconceivable that other ways are viable, that removes the sense that there is an outside.
- EvilBastard
- Overbomber
- Posts: 3934
- Joined: 01 Feb 2006, 17:48
- Location: Where the Ruined Tower shouts
sultan2075 wrote:What do you do when cultures have radically different and incompatible conceptions of good and evil?
I struggle to come up with one culture where the concept of "good" and "evil" is radically different from that of another. Certainly there are extremist religious groups who think some odd things about "good" and "evil" but they can't be taken to be representative of a culture. The weird thing about conceptions - when they exist in a vacuum, they don't change, but when they meet other conceptions then they often evolve for the better. The evolution isn't always easy, but it always happens (unless you live in Switzerland).
"I won't go down in history, but I probably will go down on your sister."
Hank Moody
Hank Moody
- nowayjose
- Utterly Bastard Groovy Amphetamine Filth
- Posts: 539
- Joined: 19 Mar 2006, 02:15
- Location: Berlin
Extremists are like magnifying glasses, they don't change the basic tenets of an ideology but simply amplify them.EvilBastard wrote:Certainly there are extremist religious groups who think some odd things about "good" and "evil" but they can't be taken to be representative of a culture.
I have some difficulty accepting that anyone could say that and not be already coming from a position of prejudice, you know.sultan2075 wrote:What do you do when cultures have radically different and incompatible conceptions of good and evil?
Aside from the total nutjobs that exist everywhere, like Johnny Towel-head running around with a sizzling bomb chanting "Allah Allah Allah", or Paddy 'Ra-head doing much the same, or even Yosemite Sam in his shack in the mountains with tinned food and a shotgun eagerly awaiting the coming collapse of society, most cultures are far far closer than you seem to be suggesting when it comes to basic concepts like human decency.
Those "radically different concepts of good and evil" - for over 99% of people they really just don't exist.
If I told them once, I told them a hundred times to put 'Spinal Tap' first and 'Puppet Show' last.
- EvilBastard
- Overbomber
- Posts: 3934
- Joined: 01 Feb 2006, 17:48
- Location: Where the Ruined Tower shouts
I think it comes down to the way the ideology is interpreted, rather than extremists amplifying the basic tenets. If you look at any ideology closely enough you can find support for the idea that it espouses violence, bigotry, proscriptive fashion advice or a low cholesterol diet. But you could read a single page of Stephen King's Cujo and conclude that it's the story of a love that a boy has for his dog, and you'd be missing an awful lot of the point.nowayjose wrote:Extremists are like magnifying glasses, they don't change the basic tenets of an ideology but simply amplify them.EvilBastard wrote:Certainly there are extremist religious groups who think some odd things about "good" and "evil" but they can't be taken to be representative of a culture.
"I won't go down in history, but I probably will go down on your sister."
Hank Moody
Hank Moody
- lazarus corporation
- Lord Protector
- Posts: 3444
- Joined: 09 May 2004, 17:42
- Location: out there on a darkened road
- Contact:
One example of radically different concepts of good and evil:mh wrote:I have some difficulty accepting that anyone could say that and not be already coming from a position of prejudice, you know.sultan2075 wrote:What do you do when cultures have radically different and incompatible conceptions of good and evil?
Aside from the total nutjobs that exist everywhere, like Johnny Towel-head running around with a sizzling bomb chanting "Allah Allah Allah", or Paddy 'Ra-head doing much the same, or even Yosemite Sam in his shack in the mountains with tinned food and a shotgun eagerly awaiting the coming collapse of society, most cultures are far far closer than you seem to be suggesting when it comes to basic concepts like human decency.
Those "radically different concepts of good and evil" - for over 99% of people they really just don't exist.
There are some cultures that see a woman's right to abortion as a good thing. There are some cultures that see abortion as an abhorrent evil. And of course there are some cultures where there are a mix of views.
- nowayjose
- Utterly Bastard Groovy Amphetamine Filth
- Posts: 539
- Joined: 19 Mar 2006, 02:15
- Location: Berlin
It's amazing how you downplay violence and bigotry by comparing them with a low cholesterol diet. It's also amazing how you assume that, for example, the founder of Islam himself apparently misinterpreted his own ideology. Maybe the archangel Gabriel should've provided him with an accompanying commentary as well. That could've saved the world quite some trouble.EvilBastard wrote: I think it comes down to the way the ideology is interpreted, rather than extremists amplifying the basic tenets. If you look at any ideology closely enough you can find support for the idea that it espouses violence, bigotry, proscriptive fashion advice or a low cholesterol diet.
- EvilBastard
- Overbomber
- Posts: 3934
- Joined: 01 Feb 2006, 17:48
- Location: Where the Ruined Tower shouts
No sure why you’re amazed. The torah bans the eating of pork and shellfish, the bible bans the wearing of mixed fibres - from this you could assume that the torah was a treatise on healthy eating and that the bible was written by one of Tim Gunn's forefathers. Are either of these representative of the fundamental tenets of Judaism or Christianity?nowayjose wrote:It's amazing how you downplay violence and bigotry by comparing them with a low cholesterol diet. It's also amazing how you assume that, for example, the founder of Islam himself apparently misinterpreted his own ideology. Maybe the archangel Gabriel should've provided him with an accompanying commentary as well. That could've saved the world quite some trouble.
It’s clear from verse 256 of Al Baqara that “there is no compulsion in religion,� which would rather seem to negate those who claim that killing non-muslims is a requirement of the faith.
It’s pretty easy when you look past the rhetoric to see the intent of ideologies. At the root they are manuals for living, guidance, advice, rather than hard-and-fast rules that are supposed to be interpreted rigidly and across the board. If the latter was the case we’d have Christians stoning unbelievers and selling their daughters into slavery. There are extremist Christians who have found a single piece of scripture and have taken it to be the whole of the lesson. They are, fortunately, in a tiny minority, but they get the press. Why should Islam be any different?
"I won't go down in history, but I probably will go down on your sister."
Hank Moody
Hank Moody
As I've said before, the irony of democracy is that you must give a voice to the hateful opinions of those who, if they ever came to power, would be the first to take that right from you.
Fortunately, come September 18, the opportunity exists for me to jettison the whole damn lot of Westminster morons and elect leaders to make entirely new and different mistakes.
Fortunately, come September 18, the opportunity exists for me to jettison the whole damn lot of Westminster morons and elect leaders to make entirely new and different mistakes.
You are what you drink - I'm a bitter man!
- nowayjose
- Utterly Bastard Groovy Amphetamine Filth
- Posts: 539
- Joined: 19 Mar 2006, 02:15
- Location: Berlin
I can't comment on Judaism since I know nothing about that. In both Christianity aswell as Koran interpretation, there is a concept called 'abrogation'. It basically means that a certain set of rules or instructions supercedes others (usually earlier ones). For example, in Christianity, the New Testament abrogates the Old Testament because (theologically) of a 'new covenant' god has made with his people through Jesus.EvilBastard wrote: No sure why you’re amazed. The torah bans the eating of pork and shellfish, the bible bans the wearing of mixed fibres - from this you could assume that the torah was a treatise on healthy eating and that the bible was written by one of Tim Gunn's forefathers. Are either of these representative of the fundamental tenets of Judaism or Christianity?
It’s clear from verse 256 of Al Baqara that “there is no compulsion in religion,� which would rather seem to negate those who claim that killing non-muslims is a requirement of the faith.
In the Koran, later pronouncements of the prophet completely invalidate conflicting earlier ones because (theologically) Allah was a bit impatient in how his campaign was going along so he decided to ramp up things a bit. That's why his newer instructions are usually harsher. So if there is a conflict, the newer, updated version is what counts, and only this. Some people might cite the "no compulsion" rule but don't take into account the abrogation rule (or intentionally suppress it) but the newer "kill the idolators wherever ye find them" abrogates, and hence supercedes the older, tolerant one.
- EvilBastard
- Overbomber
- Posts: 3934
- Joined: 01 Feb 2006, 17:48
- Location: Where the Ruined Tower shouts
If indeed the New Testament abrogates the Old, I'm guessing that so long as one is living in love (as instructed) it's quite ok to covet your neighbour's ass, dishonour your parents, and commit adultery?nowayjose wrote:I can't comment on Judaism since I know nothing about that. In both Christianity aswell as Koran interpretation, there is a concept called 'abrogation'. It basically means that a certain set of rules or instructions supercedes others (usually earlier ones). For example, in Christianity, the New Testament abrogates the Old Testament because (theologically) of a 'new covenant' god has made with his people through Jesus.EvilBastard wrote: No sure why you’re amazed. The torah bans the eating of pork and shellfish, the bible bans the wearing of mixed fibres - from this you could assume that the torah was a treatise on healthy eating and that the bible was written by one of Tim Gunn's forefathers. Are either of these representative of the fundamental tenets of Judaism or Christianity?
It’s clear from verse 256 of Al Baqara that “there is no compulsion in religion,� which would rather seem to negate those who claim that killing non-muslims is a requirement of the faith.
In the Koran, later pronouncements of the prophet completely invalidate conflicting earlier ones because (theologically) Allah was a bit impatient in how his campaign was going along so he decided to ramp up things a bit. That's why his newer instructions are usually harsher. So if there is a conflict, the newer, updated version is what counts, and only this. Some people might cite the "no compulsion" rule but don't take into account the abrogation rule (or intentionally suppress it) but the newer "kill the idolators wherever ye find them" abrogates, and hence supercedes the older, tolerant one.
Abrogation is either Allah changing his mind, or people reading the Qu'ran misunderstanding the word of Allah - given that Muslims believe that the word of god is perfect and holy, I'm going to side with the latter. Unable to understand what is being said, man misinterprets it and claims abrogation.
But let us say that The Verse of the Sword does abrogate the "no compulsion" one. Again, the danger here is to view the phrase in microcosm. True,
But it is immediately followed by:Surah 9.5 wrote:But when the forbidden months are past, then fight and slay the Pagans wherever ye find them, and seize them, beleaguer them, and lie in wait for them in every stratagem of war.
Furthermore, the context of the verse is made clear in the first line,Surah 9.6 wrote:If one amongst the Pagans ask thee for asylum, grant it to him, so that he may hear the word of Allah, and then escort him to where he can be secure. That is because they are men without knowledge.
So which verse abrogates which? Can I kill them and then give them asylum?Surah 9.1 wrote:A (declaration) of immunity from Allah and His Messenger, to those of the Pagans with whom ye have contracted mutual alliances.
"I won't go down in history, but I probably will go down on your sister."
Hank Moody
Hank Moody
- weebleswobble
- Underneath the Rock
- Posts: 5875
- Joined: 09 Feb 2006, 06:57
- Location: The Bat-Milk Cave
- Contact:
This thread is like a time warp.
The more things change, the more they stay the same.
The more things change, the more they stay the same.
‎"We will wear some very loud shirts. We will wear some very wrong trousers."
- nowayjose
- Utterly Bastard Groovy Amphetamine Filth
- Posts: 539
- Joined: 19 Mar 2006, 02:15
- Location: Berlin
I don't know. I wanted to point out that the concept of 'abrogation' exists within Islam and therefore it is shortsighted to focus on the milder, more tolerant verses since they might be superceded by newer ones.EvilBastard wrote: So which verse abrogates which? Can I kill them and then give them asylum?
If you read that whole sura, it is hard not to see it as the ramblings of a madman. Trying to make sense of the verses, especially vis a vis each other, is probably a lost cause. Of course Mohammed was illiterate, so one cannot assume he knew exactly what he had said a week earlier. Which also means that as the muslims gained ground and won battles, the pronouncements became more radical to both justify the ongoing pillaging aswell as to egg on his followers.
- EvilBastard
- Overbomber
- Posts: 3934
- Joined: 01 Feb 2006, 17:48
- Location: Where the Ruined Tower shouts
It doesn't. It exists only in the minds of those calling themselves islamic scholars. The word of god is by its very definition perfect, there can be no abrogation. Where abrogation appears, it is the result of man's inability to understand the word of god.nowayjose wrote:I don't know. I wanted to point out that the concept of 'abrogation' exists within Islam and therefore it is shortsighted to focus on the milder, more tolerant verses since they might be superceded by newer ones.
You could level the same accusation at any religious text, or political manifesto (bringing us neatly back to UKIP). Plenty of pillage, bloodletting, and general skullduggery evident in all of them - to single out the Qu'ran as a benchmark for cultural incompatibility is a bit blinkered, imho - for sure, if you take the words literally, it's a handbook for religious genocide. But view it through the lense of your average 21st century muslim-in-the-street and it's a guidebook - don't drink, be charitable, don't abuse animals, dress modestly, and honour the contracts that you have made with everyone, regardless of religion - which could be taken to include both social and business contracts.nowayjose wrote:If you read that whole sura, it is hard not to see it as the ramblings of a madman. Trying to make sense of the verses, especially vis a vis each other, is probably a lost cause. Of course Mohammed was illiterate, so one cannot assume he knew exactly what he had said a week earlier. Which also means that as the muslims gained ground and won battles, the pronouncements became more radical to both justify the ongoing pillaging aswell as to egg on his followers.
The problems come when society closes itself off, allowing extremism to flourish in the dark. Openness pushes extremists (religious or political) into the light where they can be seen and rejected by everyone else, which is how it should be. UKIP's platform seems to want to put Britain in a timewarp that sees the world as individual fiefdoms between which impermeable borders exist. Anyone who has gone online, or traveled/lived outside their "home" country, knows that such a view indicates an abject ignorance of the world. "They can come here, but they have to be like us." Yeah, because we want a homogenous society, where we're all the same, or where the differences between us are so slight as to make no difference.
Fine - if that's what you want, then vote UKIP. You'd be voting (imho) for a really boring world, but you have the right to vote for what you want. And so do the rest of us - kind of how it works. I will not stop you from voting UKIP - but those who do should put their money where their mouths are. Stop using money, arabic numbering, stop practicing law, drive only British vehicles, pare your language back to gaelic, if I catch you using words like shufti, bungalow, or jungle I'm making you wear a sign saying "I'm a fuckwit", and best be careful about what you eat - can't be too careful with that foreign rubbish.
You can stand on the beach and shout all you like - come tell me when you've been able to turn back the tide.
"I won't go down in history, but I probably will go down on your sister."
Hank Moody
Hank Moody
- hellboy69
- Utterly Bastard Groovy Amphetamine Filth
- Posts: 851
- Joined: 15 Aug 2005, 12:45
- Location: The Shire
- Contact:
Weebs = Cap'n Sensibleweebleswobble wrote:This thread is like a time warp.
The more things change, the more they stay the same.
Seconded.Nikolas Vitus Lagartija wrote:Whatever happened to the spirit of "Sisters gegen Nazis" ??
Whenever I remember I have my gegen nazis vest, I resume worrying that people will see the swastika and "Nazis" and dive straight for the wrong end of the stick. Would otherwise be tempted to wear it to the polling station todayNikolas Vitus Lagartija wrote:Whatever happened to the spirit of "Sisters gegen Nazis" ??
- hellboy69
- Utterly Bastard Groovy Amphetamine Filth
- Posts: 851
- Joined: 15 Aug 2005, 12:45
- Location: The Shire
- Contact:
Yeah, i took my patch off me jacket back in t'day for same reason ~ but hey it's the thought that counts.aims wrote:Whenever I remember I have my gegen nazis vest, I resume worrying that people will see the swastika and "Nazis" and dive straight for the wrong end of the stick. Would otherwise be tempted to wear it to the polling station today