|
Although this thread does not function under the same strict guidelines as the USPMT, it is still a general practice on TL to provide a source with an explanation on why it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion. Failure to do so will result in a mod action. |
On January 14 2016 10:30 Narw wrote:Show nested quote +On January 13 2016 23:59 maybenexttime wrote:On January 13 2016 22:15 kornetka wrote:The European Commission has opened an unprecedented inquiry into whether new Polish laws break EU democracy rules.
The step comes after President Andrzej Duda approved controversial laws enabling the conservative Law and Justice (PiS) government to appoint the heads of public TV and radio, and choose judges for Poland's constitutional court.
Addressing the Polish parliament on Wednesday, Prime Minister Beata Szydlo denied that her government had violated democratic norms. www.bbc.com Regarding the recent changes to public media, I am wondering whether the EU/German politicians criticizing them are aware of how things worked heretofore and of various abuses of the PO-PSL coalition regarding media and free speech (some examples in the quote below). Because as far as I can tell, the changes come down to the fact that previously the heads of public TV and radio were nominated by the government by proxy and now they are going to be nominated directly. When PO-PSL took over, they carried out a thorough cleansing of public media. Public TV and radio under their control were hardly objective, with some channels and journalists being blatantly biased. It did not seem to bother the EU at all. + Show Spoiler [Polish Minister of Justice, Zbigniew Z…] +
Dear Commissioner,
I do not have the habit of responding to unwise comments about Poland coming from foreign politicians, because they are telling about them. However I was provoked by what you didn't tell, and what I expected from you - as from commissionaire.
Public opinion in Germany, and also in Poland, was shocked by mass sexual attacks on females, which happened during NYE in German cities. Events which raise concern, also about safety of Polish people staying in Germany, were hidden for few days by German media. Former German Interior Minister Hans-Peter Friedrich even called it "the cartel of silence". Censoring of this information by the German media dumbfounded public opinion in the world. I waited in vain for a strong reaction from you at such a flagrant violation of citizens' right to information. I came to the unpleasant conclusion that it's easier for you to talk about fictitious threats to media freedom in other countries, rather than condemn censorship in your own homeland.
Mr Oettinger,
a week ago, in an interview for "Frankfurter Allgemeine Sonntagszeitung" you criticized actions of democratically elected Polish parliament and government, which is going to restore the objectivity and independence of the public media in Poland. You demanded to put Poland under supervision.
This kind of words, spoken by a German politician have worst connotations among Poles. Also, me. I am the grandson of a Polish officer who, during World War II fought in the underground Home Army with the "German supervision."
Dear Commissioner,
where you have been when in June 2014. agents of special forces stormed the editorial office of one of the biggest weeklies in Poland "Wprost" and tried to tore from its editor-in-chief, his laptop with recordings compromising the previous government, headed by the current head of European Council - Donald Tusk?! In your own country, similar assault of editorial office, of the weekly "Der Spiegel" in 1962 was a huge scandal and led to the collapse of the government.
Why escaped your mind the fact, which was covered by all Polish media, that more than 80 Polish journalists and lawyers who dealt with the matter of this compromising tapes, were bugged?! The secret services have used undercover operatives for surveillance of independent media.
Will you find an excuse for dismissing of half thousand employees, of the Polish Television, and forcing them to work in the outer company, in humiliating conditions, which happened during a reign of PO-PSL?! These parties are still your coalition partners, in the EPP Group, in the European Parliament. An introduction to the mass purges in public television was the removing of several dozen independent journalists, shortly after previous government took the power.
How do you assess the fact that the previous government, caused the dismissal of the editor-in-chief and journalists of the independent, influential, daily newspaper "Rzeczpospolita" and weekly "Uważam Rze"? Most of the shares that government had of those companies, was passed into the hands of the friendly businessman. Dismissals were a consequence of a single article, which put into question the government investigation of plane crash in Smolensk, which killed Polish President coming from the opposite political camp.
Why are you silent when the German-Swiss publisher Ringier Axel Springer, owner of several media in Poland, including "Newsweek", in a dramatic way denies press independence, and openly supports protests aimed against democratically elected Polish parliament and government?! The authorities of this foreign company approved the behavior of the chief editor of "Newsweek" Tomasz Lis, who came out of the role of a journalist, and during street demonstrations fueled anti-government speech. Would you be silent if the head of the largest German weekly "Der Spiegel" Klaus Brinkbäumer demonstrated in the center of Berlin, demanding the removal, by mass protests, the government of Angela Merkel?!
Dear Commissioner,
in your country, Germany, there is a saying: "cuius regions - eius radio," which means "who have power - have a radio" It boils down to a simple principle that heads of public radio and television are appointed by politicians currently exercising power. The Media Act, which being worked on by Polish government, provides a much more democratic solution. It assumes that the National Media Council will be elected by the president and both houses of parliament.
I don't have your impudence to teach Germans that they should adopt similar principles. I will not call for lowering German flag on masts after NYE attacks, like you proposed with EU flags in countries that are indebted in Germany.
Please - be more restrained, and objective - for the seriousness of your office.
Yours faithfully, Zbigniew Ziobro
The emphasis is mine. Source (the translation appears unofficial, as there are some grammatical errors etc.): https://www.reddit.com/r/europe/comments/408an8/open_letter_from_polish_minister_of_justice_to_ue/ Why you are trying to downgrade what just happened? From 28 countries in EU this happens to Poland. Ziobro focuses so hard on national media, when lets be honest, is not the main thing here. The night legislation in Sejm, the speed and TIMES (night shifts anyone) at which enactments are pushed. The absolute ignorance of lawyers oppinions when it came to Constitutional Tribunal, the fact that country is basicly ruled at the moment by a old man who dosn't take any constitutional responsibility. This is first time ever i have this disgusting feeling that my Prime Minster and President are nothing more than puppets. It was bad first time with Marcinkiewicz, now it's just hillarious. That emotional bullshit from Ziobro you just quoted is all that is, emotional bullshit. I hope sanctions don't hit Poland and i hope PiS realizes that it needs to function by rules set by EU (as we are in EU and befefit from that) and most important like a democratic country, not Belorus. EU representatives also needs to shut the fuck and think few times before they sprout moronics like "putinzation of europpean politics". Yes Schultz, it dosn't hurt to use brain a bit before opening mouth. Instead of focusing on stopping the Nord Stream 2 now, Poland is now the target of investigation. That will greatly incrase our importance in EU and our political strenght. Great job PiS, took you 2 months.
This.
|
European Commission economists have been banned from researching the impact of Britain leaving the 28-nation bloc, or even talking about it, for fear of getting embroiled in the heated British debate ahead of a referendum, officials said.
"There is an internal order not to discuss or study the impact of Brexit," a senior Commission official told Reuters, adding that the instruction had come from the office of European Union chief executive Jean-Claude Juncker.
As a result, the Commission's economic forecasts for the euro zone and the wider EU will take account of political and financial risks in China, the Middle East and the United States but not the glaringly obvious risk that Britain, the EU's second biggest economy, may vote to leave.
Another senior EU official said the Commission had learned to its cost the consequences of such contingency planning last year. It insisted it had no "Plan B" to manage a possible Grexit -- the risk of Greece leaving the euro zone.
Then word of just such plans leaked out, causing further upset in Athens and the money markets.
"We learned from the Grexit thing," the second official said of the lack of contingency plans for Brexit. "If we do it, the press will find out about it. So this time we're not doing it."
Unlike the possibility of a Grexit, which could have happened suddenly after Athens defaulted on an IMF loan last June, Britain will face a lengthy period of negotiating the unwinding of its 43-year EU membership if voters decide to leave in a referendum promised by Prime Minister David Cameron.
Many assume it would take at least two years, giving the Commission time to work out economic consequences.
The costs and benefits of EU membership for the British economy will be a key issue in the referendum campaign.
Cameron is trying to negotiate changes to the bloc before a mid-February summit and says he will campaign for Britain to stay in if his demands are met.
Opinion polls on the referendum, which could be held as early as June, show voters almost evenly split. Juncker and national leaders across Europe say they will work hard to avoid losing Britain.
But with data being seized on by both camps to back their arguments and Britain's boisterous and often Eurosceptic press in full cry for the campaign, the EU executive has decided it has little to gain by working out what might happen if it does.
uk.reuters.com
Not sure if sticking your head in the sand is smart but whatever.
|
On January 14 2016 10:30 Narw wrote:Show nested quote +On January 13 2016 23:59 maybenexttime wrote:On January 13 2016 22:15 kornetka wrote:The European Commission has opened an unprecedented inquiry into whether new Polish laws break EU democracy rules.
The step comes after President Andrzej Duda approved controversial laws enabling the conservative Law and Justice (PiS) government to appoint the heads of public TV and radio, and choose judges for Poland's constitutional court.
Addressing the Polish parliament on Wednesday, Prime Minister Beata Szydlo denied that her government had violated democratic norms. www.bbc.com Regarding the recent changes to public media, I am wondering whether the EU/German politicians criticizing them are aware of how things worked heretofore and of various abuses of the PO-PSL coalition regarding media and free speech (some examples in the quote below). Because as far as I can tell, the changes come down to the fact that previously the heads of public TV and radio were nominated by the government by proxy and now they are going to be nominated directly. When PO-PSL took over, they carried out a thorough cleansing of public media. Public TV and radio under their control were hardly objective, with some channels and journalists being blatantly biased. It did not seem to bother the EU at all. + Show Spoiler [Polish Minister of Justice, Zbigniew Z…] +
Dear Commissioner,
I do not have the habit of responding to unwise comments about Poland coming from foreign politicians, because they are telling about them. However I was provoked by what you didn't tell, and what I expected from you - as from commissionaire.
Public opinion in Germany, and also in Poland, was shocked by mass sexual attacks on females, which happened during NYE in German cities. Events which raise concern, also about safety of Polish people staying in Germany, were hidden for few days by German media. Former German Interior Minister Hans-Peter Friedrich even called it "the cartel of silence". Censoring of this information by the German media dumbfounded public opinion in the world. I waited in vain for a strong reaction from you at such a flagrant violation of citizens' right to information. I came to the unpleasant conclusion that it's easier for you to talk about fictitious threats to media freedom in other countries, rather than condemn censorship in your own homeland.
Mr Oettinger,
a week ago, in an interview for "Frankfurter Allgemeine Sonntagszeitung" you criticized actions of democratically elected Polish parliament and government, which is going to restore the objectivity and independence of the public media in Poland. You demanded to put Poland under supervision.
This kind of words, spoken by a German politician have worst connotations among Poles. Also, me. I am the grandson of a Polish officer who, during World War II fought in the underground Home Army with the "German supervision."
Dear Commissioner,
where you have been when in June 2014. agents of special forces stormed the editorial office of one of the biggest weeklies in Poland "Wprost" and tried to tore from its editor-in-chief, his laptop with recordings compromising the previous government, headed by the current head of European Council - Donald Tusk?! In your own country, similar assault of editorial office, of the weekly "Der Spiegel" in 1962 was a huge scandal and led to the collapse of the government.
Why escaped your mind the fact, which was covered by all Polish media, that more than 80 Polish journalists and lawyers who dealt with the matter of this compromising tapes, were bugged?! The secret services have used undercover operatives for surveillance of independent media.
Will you find an excuse for dismissing of half thousand employees, of the Polish Television, and forcing them to work in the outer company, in humiliating conditions, which happened during a reign of PO-PSL?! These parties are still your coalition partners, in the EPP Group, in the European Parliament. An introduction to the mass purges in public television was the removing of several dozen independent journalists, shortly after previous government took the power.
How do you assess the fact that the previous government, caused the dismissal of the editor-in-chief and journalists of the independent, influential, daily newspaper "Rzeczpospolita" and weekly "Uważam Rze"? Most of the shares that government had of those companies, was passed into the hands of the friendly businessman. Dismissals were a consequence of a single article, which put into question the government investigation of plane crash in Smolensk, which killed Polish President coming from the opposite political camp.
Why are you silent when the German-Swiss publisher Ringier Axel Springer, owner of several media in Poland, including "Newsweek", in a dramatic way denies press independence, and openly supports protests aimed against democratically elected Polish parliament and government?! The authorities of this foreign company approved the behavior of the chief editor of "Newsweek" Tomasz Lis, who came out of the role of a journalist, and during street demonstrations fueled anti-government speech. Would you be silent if the head of the largest German weekly "Der Spiegel" Klaus Brinkbäumer demonstrated in the center of Berlin, demanding the removal, by mass protests, the government of Angela Merkel?!
Dear Commissioner,
in your country, Germany, there is a saying: "cuius regions - eius radio," which means "who have power - have a radio" It boils down to a simple principle that heads of public radio and television are appointed by politicians currently exercising power. The Media Act, which being worked on by Polish government, provides a much more democratic solution. It assumes that the National Media Council will be elected by the president and both houses of parliament.
I don't have your impudence to teach Germans that they should adopt similar principles. I will not call for lowering German flag on masts after NYE attacks, like you proposed with EU flags in countries that are indebted in Germany.
Please - be more restrained, and objective - for the seriousness of your office.
Yours faithfully, Zbigniew Ziobro
The emphasis is mine. Source (the translation appears unofficial, as there are some grammatical errors etc.): https://www.reddit.com/r/europe/comments/408an8/open_letter_from_polish_minister_of_justice_to_ue/ Why you are trying to downgrade what just happened? From 28 countries in EU this happens to Poland. Ziobro focuses so hard on national media, when lets be honest, is not the main thing here.
This happens to Poland because PO kept begging EPP to do this. Liberadzki's comment about pyromaniac-firefighters is spot on...
http://wiadomosci.onet.pl/tylko-w-onecie/liberadzki-epp-i-po-nie-lubia-sie-z-pis-wiec-robia-wokol-polski-wielka-sprawe-wywiad/dq6gtz
(or Schetyna's tapes recently released by Newsweek)
The night legislation in Sejm, the speed and TIMES (night shifts anyone) at which enactments are pushed. The absolute ignorance of lawyers oppinions when it came to Constitutional Tribunal, the fact that country is basicly ruled at the moment by a old man who dosn't take any constitutional responsibility. This is first time ever i have this disgusting feeling that my Prime Minster and President are nothing more than puppets. It was bad first time with Marcinkiewicz, now it's just hillarious.
I am not a fan of night legislation either. But where were you when PO did that, on many occasions? Neither am I a fan of Kaczyński ruling from the back seat or the man himself. But you have to give some credit to PO for their black PR campaign lasting since 2005 which made Kaczyński unelectable for many people. Also how do you feel about Kopacz, who also was a mere puppet?
As for the Constitutional Tribunal, your view is very one-sided. There is actually no consensus among the experts on the Constitution. Like I've explained on numerous occasions in this thread, the whole situation is very far from being black and white. PO did not even follow the procedures when nominating the new judges, which alone is reason enough to render those nominations invalid... Then we have the CT acting outside its jurisdiction, the president of the CT ignoring the law, and many other issues.
That emotional bullshit from Ziobro you just quoted is all that is, emotional bullshit. I hope sanctions don't hit Poland and i hope PiS realizes that it needs to function by rules set by EU (as we are in EU and befefit from that) and most important like a democratic country, not Belorus.
You are missing the point (and I bolded it for you). PO's transgressions regarding the media and free speech were FAR, FAR WORSE than anything PiS has done so far. PO (1) did a thorough cleansing of public media and made them even more biased than they used to be, (2) had special forces storm the editorial office of a weekly that released tapes revealing how shady they are ("Wprost") and (3) had the police keep the journalists and lawyers involved kept under illegal surveillance, (4) forced "Rzeczpospolita" to chage its editor in chief and (5) effectively destroyed another weekly they were unconfortable with ("Uważam Rze"), and last but not least tried to pass ACTA without the people even knowing!
What PO was doing was a SERIOUS threat to free speech. The EU did not give a shit (hell, the EU was pushing for ACTA itself!). Suddenly they are concerned because PiS took over the public media?
EU representatives also needs to shut the fuck and think few times before they sprout moronics like "putinzation of europpean politics". Yes Schultz, it dosn't hurt to use brain a bit before opening mouth.
It's hard to take them seriously at this point...
Instead of focusing on stopping the Nord Stream 2 now, Poland is now the target of investigation. That will greatly incrase our importance in EU and our political strenght. Great job PiS, took you 2 months.
It is PO and their friends that are to blame here. First, they are responsible for the Nord Stream fuck-up (with Tusk believing he and Merkel are bff's and she would keep her word). Second, they have been doing everything they could to obstruct PiS, including the procedure we're talking about. They (and the associated media) were riling people up to the streets before PiS even did anything.
|
On January 14 2016 17:53 RvB wrote:Show nested quote +European Commission economists have been banned from researching the impact of Britain leaving the 28-nation bloc, or even talking about it, for fear of getting embroiled in the heated British debate ahead of a referendum, officials said.
"There is an internal order not to discuss or study the impact of Brexit," a senior Commission official told Reuters, adding that the instruction had come from the office of European Union chief executive Jean-Claude Juncker.
As a result, the Commission's economic forecasts for the euro zone and the wider EU will take account of political and financial risks in China, the Middle East and the United States but not the glaringly obvious risk that Britain, the EU's second biggest economy, may vote to leave.
Another senior EU official said the Commission had learned to its cost the consequences of such contingency planning last year. It insisted it had no "Plan B" to manage a possible Grexit -- the risk of Greece leaving the euro zone.
Then word of just such plans leaked out, causing further upset in Athens and the money markets.
"We learned from the Grexit thing," the second official said of the lack of contingency plans for Brexit. "If we do it, the press will find out about it. So this time we're not doing it."
Unlike the possibility of a Grexit, which could have happened suddenly after Athens defaulted on an IMF loan last June, Britain will face a lengthy period of negotiating the unwinding of its 43-year EU membership if voters decide to leave in a referendum promised by Prime Minister David Cameron.
Many assume it would take at least two years, giving the Commission time to work out economic consequences.
The costs and benefits of EU membership for the British economy will be a key issue in the referendum campaign.
Cameron is trying to negotiate changes to the bloc before a mid-February summit and says he will campaign for Britain to stay in if his demands are met.
Opinion polls on the referendum, which could be held as early as June, show voters almost evenly split. Juncker and national leaders across Europe say they will work hard to avoid losing Britain.
But with data being seized on by both camps to back their arguments and Britain's boisterous and often Eurosceptic press in full cry for the campaign, the EU executive has decided it has little to gain by working out what might happen if it does. uk.reuters.comNot sure if sticking your head in the sand is smart but whatever.
My girlfriend just turned in her masters thesis on the ramification of a Brexit (though mostly focusing on the ramifications for UK), so there will be at least one report out there 
|
Man, PO paid political price for it's mistakes. They are not rulling party at the moment.
PiS is the rulling party with 50% majority in Sejm. Do you seriously believe the way they handle stuff is good now? Do you think this is good politics?
Let me use your narration. Like, you said it, "nothing happened" and streets were full of people who actually got concerned. About nothing happening. There is something horribly wrong with the way PiS does things if protests arise over nothing. So what if something actually happens?
Also about "hard to take em seriously" - they need to be taken seriously, PiS needs to get over it's own ego and suck it up instead of going with "bad German no teach me" like Liberadzki called it in that interview.
Politics is not only about if you do "good or bad things", it's about how you PR em and how you prepare public oppinion.
|
On January 14 2016 19:19 Narw wrote:
Man, PO paid political price for it's mistakes. They are not rulling party at the moment.
Fortunately so.
PiS is the rulling party with 50% majority in Sejm. Do you seriously believe the way they handle is good now? Do you think this is good politics?
No, but I think they are doing okay. Please, let us not pretend that it's is just PiS that is being confrontational about those issues. PO et al. (Nowoczesna, associated media, etc.), as well as the EU institutions were very negative towards the new government from the very beginning. You could hear about the EU politicians "being concerned", about "Poland electing far-right nationalists" or "populist nationalists" or "Poland turning authoritarian" way before PiS did anything.
Let me use your narration. Like, you said it, "nothing happened" and streets were full of people who actually got concerned. About nothing happening. There is something horribly wrong with the way PiS does things if protests arise over nothing. So what if something actually happens?
I did not say nothing happened. What PiS is doing is mildly controversial (would've been better had they accepted the three judges nominated by PO - even though PO really did not follow the procedures; instead PiS chose to punish PO for being sleazy with those nominations). My point is that over the past 8 years PO did A LOT of things that were much more controversial than anythng PiS has done recently, and they pretty much did not face any backlash from the EU institutions or the mainstream media (neither Polish nor foreign). The media actually tried to sweep many of their abuses under the carpet until it could no longer be done. Do the blatant double standard not bother you?
As for your question, it appears to me that PiS would face this sort of backlash regardless of what they do. The criticism from PO et al. is irrational. Take the KOD protests, for example. One of their claims is that free speech (and even freedom of gatherings) are being seriously threatened these days. Do you remember how PO treated protesting people or how little respect they had for free speech? Kukiz 15, SLD and PSL are trying to be constructive, on the other hand.
Also about "hard to take em seriously" - they need to be taken seriously, PiS needs to get over it's own ego and suck it up instead of going with "bad German no teach me" like Liberadzki called it in that interview.
Indeed. PiS should focus on providing the EU institutions with information, hard facts, such as English translations of the potentially controversial regulations they intend to pass, and well as the context (such as the fact that taking over the public media is, unfortunately, normal in Poland). The problem is that the EU institutions are relying solely on the narrative of PO and "Gazeta Wyborcza" et al. (through foreign media, which is pretty much a copypasta of GW), and I'm afraid they would be unwilling to sympathize with the point of view of eurosceptics.
By the way, I believe that Liberadzki is actually from SLD.
|
On January 14 2016 19:12 Ghostcom wrote:Show nested quote +On January 14 2016 17:53 RvB wrote:European Commission economists have been banned from researching the impact of Britain leaving the 28-nation bloc, or even talking about it, for fear of getting embroiled in the heated British debate ahead of a referendum, officials said.
"There is an internal order not to discuss or study the impact of Brexit," a senior Commission official told Reuters, adding that the instruction had come from the office of European Union chief executive Jean-Claude Juncker.
As a result, the Commission's economic forecasts for the euro zone and the wider EU will take account of political and financial risks in China, the Middle East and the United States but not the glaringly obvious risk that Britain, the EU's second biggest economy, may vote to leave.
Another senior EU official said the Commission had learned to its cost the consequences of such contingency planning last year. It insisted it had no "Plan B" to manage a possible Grexit -- the risk of Greece leaving the euro zone.
Then word of just such plans leaked out, causing further upset in Athens and the money markets.
"We learned from the Grexit thing," the second official said of the lack of contingency plans for Brexit. "If we do it, the press will find out about it. So this time we're not doing it."
Unlike the possibility of a Grexit, which could have happened suddenly after Athens defaulted on an IMF loan last June, Britain will face a lengthy period of negotiating the unwinding of its 43-year EU membership if voters decide to leave in a referendum promised by Prime Minister David Cameron.
Many assume it would take at least two years, giving the Commission time to work out economic consequences.
The costs and benefits of EU membership for the British economy will be a key issue in the referendum campaign.
Cameron is trying to negotiate changes to the bloc before a mid-February summit and says he will campaign for Britain to stay in if his demands are met.
Opinion polls on the referendum, which could be held as early as June, show voters almost evenly split. Juncker and national leaders across Europe say they will work hard to avoid losing Britain.
But with data being seized on by both camps to back their arguments and Britain's boisterous and often Eurosceptic press in full cry for the campaign, the EU executive has decided it has little to gain by working out what might happen if it does. uk.reuters.comNot sure if sticking your head in the sand is smart but whatever. My girlfriend just turned in her masters thesis on the ramification of a Brexit (though mostly focusing on the ramifications for UK), so there will be at least one report out there
Ah nice. Really interesting subject and very complex too. Hope she passes! ^^
|
|
|
Zizek is a genius, but this analysis is way off imo. Religion cast aside once again (while being the major issue) and honestly, trying to interpret islamic terrorism through a marxist reading is too far off. Take a look at this part from the article:
Badiou is totally right in his claim that the search for the roots of today’s Muslim terrorism in ancient religious texts (the “it is all already in Quran” story) is misleading: one should instead focus on today’s global capitalism and conceive Islamo-fascism as one of the modes to react to its lure by way of inverting envy into hatred.
This is terribly wrong. Just to cite one fact, Al-Baghdadi has a PhD in Islamic Studies - not in Economy & Marketing.
Also, Islamo-fascism is such a bad word lol. The word 'fascism' completely lost its meaning - its usage has basically switched to an insult like 'assassin'.
|
No I think the historical materialist perspective is absolutely correct. No one would go around and consider the IRA insurgency to be rooted in Christian traditions or consider the Nazis to be pagan warriors. This weird spiritualism that always occurs when people analyze foreign conflicts is ridiculous.
Especially when the tactics of terrorists, suicide, attacking other Muslims, children, women and so on go completely against even the most archaic interpretation of scripture. There's nothing religious about terrorism. Islamo-fascism is a very silly word. Fascism is a post-religious ideology.
|
On January 15 2016 04:13 Nyxisto wrote:
No I think the historical materialist perspective is absolutely correct. No one would go around and consider the IRA insurgency to be rooted in Christian traditions or consider the Nazis to be pagan warriors. This weird spiritualism that always occurs when people analyze foreign conflicts is ridiculous.
Especially when the tactics of terrorists, suicide, attacking other Muslims, children, women and so on go completely against even the most archaic interpretation of scripture. There's nothing religious about terrorism. Islamo-fascism is a very silly word. Fascism is a post-religious ideology.
No. I don't get your examples - they never, ever said that their objective was something religious. ISIS did and does.
Your second point argues that since they attack other muslims they are not muslims? If you talk to someone from ISIS, they will probably tell you that they are following the right interpretation. There is no right way to discern it, because the islamic world lacks a central authority like the papal one.
And, to quote Sam Harris in his last interview:
We can also look outside the Muslim world to see that mere injustice and inequality rarely produce such destructive behavior. Many countries in Latin America have legitimate grievances against the U.S. Where are the Guatemalan suicide bombers? Where are the Cherokee suicide bombers, for that matter? If oppression were enough, the Tibetans should have been practicing suicidal terrorism against the Chinese for decades. Instead, they practice self-immolation, for reasons that are totally understandable within the context of their own religious beliefs. Again, specific beliefs matter, and we deny this at our peril. If the behavior of Muslim suicide bombers should tell us anything, it’s that certain people really do believe in martyrdom. Let me be very clear about this: I’m not talking about all (or even most) Muslims—I’m talking about jihadists. But all jihadists are Muslim. If even 1 percent of the world’s Muslims are potential jihadists, we have a terrible problem on our hands. I’m not sure how we deal with 16 million aspiring martyrs—but lying to ourselves about the nature of the problem doesn’t seem like the best strategy.
EDIT: Fascism is not a post-religious ideology. In fact, fascism is referred to as 'imperfect dictature' because it didn't depose the King of Italy and Mussolini signed a specific pact with the Pope (Patti Lateranensi). One of the mottos of Fascism was 'Dio,Patria, Famiglia' (God, Homeland, Family) - fascism wanted religion to be part of it, or at least be solidary with it. It is in no way a post-religious movement.
|
On January 15 2016 04:54 SoSexy wrote:Show nested quote +On January 15 2016 04:13 Nyxisto wrote:
No I think the historical materialist perspective is absolutely correct. No one would go around and consider the IRA insurgency to be rooted in Christian traditions or consider the Nazis to be pagan warriors. This weird spiritualism that always occurs when people analyze foreign conflicts is ridiculous.
Especially when the tactics of terrorists, suicide, attacking other Muslims, children, women and so on go completely against even the most archaic interpretation of scripture. There's nothing religious about terrorism. Islamo-fascism is a very silly word. Fascism is a post-religious ideology. No. I don't get your examples - they never, ever said that their objective was something religious. ISIS did and does. Your second point argues that since they attack other muslims they are not muslims? If you talk to someone from ISIS, they will probably tell you that they are following the right interpretation. There is no right way to discern it, because the islamic world lacks a central authority like the papal one. And, to quote Sam Harris in his last interview: We can also look outside the Muslim world to see that mere injustice and inequality rarely produce such destructive behavior. Many countries in Latin America have legitimate grievances against the U.S. Where are the Guatemalan suicide bombers? Where are the Cherokee suicide bombers, for that matter? If oppression were enough, the Tibetans should have been practicing suicidal terrorism against the Chinese for decades. Instead, they practice self-immolation, for reasons that are totally understandable within the context of their own religious beliefs. Again, specific beliefs matter, and we deny this at our peril. If the behavior of Muslim suicide bombers should tell us anything, it’s that certain people really do believe in martyrdom. Let me be very clear about this: I’m not talking about all (or even most) Muslims—I’m talking about jihadists. But all jihadists are Muslim. If even 1 percent of the world’s Muslims are potential jihadists, we have a terrible problem on our hands. I’m not sure how we deal with 16 million aspiring martyrs—but lying to ourselves about the nature of the problem doesn’t seem like the best strategy.EDIT: Fascism is not a post-religious ideology. In fact, fascism is referred to as 'imperfect dictature' because it didn't depose the King of Italy and Mussolini signed a specific pact with the Pope (Patti Lateranensi). One of the mottos of Fascism was 'Dio,Patria, Famiglia' (God, Homeland, Family) - fascism wanted religion to be part of it, or at least be solidary with it. It is in no way a post-religious movement.
I think the important nuance here - and what he means by facism being a "post-religious" ideology - is that while facism may use religion as a tool to strengthen its hold on society, to discipline people into a rigid way of thinking, the core parameter used by facism to group people into categories is not religion, it's race. To an Italian facist of the 30s, a catholic Pole was inferior to a catholic Italian, because the former isn't Italian. Contrarily, in religion-based idologies like the one ISIS is displaying, what separates people is religion : to a jihadist, a fellow follower of the IS is an equal because they are Sunni Muslims, even if they have different passports or different skin colors.
|
Fascism is very much post-religious, at least in contrast to the Abrahamitic religions. Fascism focus on the 'inner-worldy' and the 'organic society' Transcendent religions like Christianity or Islam are 'inorganic', they put absolute rules in place that fascists have no use for because their violence is uninhibited and absolute. Religious violence is almost always a means to an end, with rules and limits, for fascists violence is an end to itself. Hence the Nazis deliberate goal to 'paganize' Christianity and remove all the abstract stuff that they had no use for. Modern terrorism is completely blind in that fascist sense.
|
Fascism inner-wordly? Have you ever read Gentile? This is ridicolous. Your posts are seriously difficult to make sense of. All your concepts are so mixed that the result is a giant mess - no personal offense, but every sentence you say is debatable
|
On January 15 2016 05:17 OtherWorld wrote:Show nested quote +On January 15 2016 04:54 SoSexy wrote:On January 15 2016 04:13 Nyxisto wrote:
No I think the historical materialist perspective is absolutely correct. No one would go around and consider the IRA insurgency to be rooted in Christian traditions or consider the Nazis to be pagan warriors. This weird spiritualism that always occurs when people analyze foreign conflicts is ridiculous.
Especially when the tactics of terrorists, suicide, attacking other Muslims, children, women and so on go completely against even the most archaic interpretation of scripture. There's nothing religious about terrorism. Islamo-fascism is a very silly word. Fascism is a post-religious ideology. No. I don't get your examples - they never, ever said that their objective was something religious. ISIS did and does. Your second point argues that since they attack other muslims they are not muslims? If you talk to someone from ISIS, they will probably tell you that they are following the right interpretation. There is no right way to discern it, because the islamic world lacks a central authority like the papal one. And, to quote Sam Harris in his last interview: We can also look outside the Muslim world to see that mere injustice and inequality rarely produce such destructive behavior. Many countries in Latin America have legitimate grievances against the U.S. Where are the Guatemalan suicide bombers? Where are the Cherokee suicide bombers, for that matter? If oppression were enough, the Tibetans should have been practicing suicidal terrorism against the Chinese for decades. Instead, they practice self-immolation, for reasons that are totally understandable within the context of their own religious beliefs. Again, specific beliefs matter, and we deny this at our peril. If the behavior of Muslim suicide bombers should tell us anything, it’s that certain people really do believe in martyrdom. Let me be very clear about this: I’m not talking about all (or even most) Muslims—I’m talking about jihadists. But all jihadists are Muslim. If even 1 percent of the world’s Muslims are potential jihadists, we have a terrible problem on our hands. I’m not sure how we deal with 16 million aspiring martyrs—but lying to ourselves about the nature of the problem doesn’t seem like the best strategy.EDIT: Fascism is not a post-religious ideology. In fact, fascism is referred to as 'imperfect dictature' because it didn't depose the King of Italy and Mussolini signed a specific pact with the Pope (Patti Lateranensi). One of the mottos of Fascism was 'Dio,Patria, Famiglia' (God, Homeland, Family) - fascism wanted religion to be part of it, or at least be solidary with it. It is in no way a post-religious movement. I think the important nuance here - and what he means by facism being a "post-religious" ideology - is that while facism may use religion as a tool to strengthen its hold on society, to discipline people into a rigid way of thinking, the core parameter used by facism to group people into categories is not religion, it's race. To an Italian facist of the 30s, a catholic Pole was inferior to a catholic Italian, because the former isn't Italian. Contrarily, in religion-based idologies like the one ISIS is displaying, what separates people is religion : to a jihadist, a fellow follower of the IS is an equal because they are Sunni Muslims, even if they have different passports or different skin colors.
But that's not totally true - for example, there were Italians that gladly went to Spain to join Franco's fight.
But I am confused because I think you switched my position and Nyxisto's?
|
On January 15 2016 05:30 SoSexy wrote:Show nested quote +On January 15 2016 05:17 OtherWorld wrote:On January 15 2016 04:54 SoSexy wrote:On January 15 2016 04:13 Nyxisto wrote:
No I think the historical materialist perspective is absolutely correct. No one would go around and consider the IRA insurgency to be rooted in Christian traditions or consider the Nazis to be pagan warriors. This weird spiritualism that always occurs when people analyze foreign conflicts is ridiculous.
Especially when the tactics of terrorists, suicide, attacking other Muslims, children, women and so on go completely against even the most archaic interpretation of scripture. There's nothing religious about terrorism. Islamo-fascism is a very silly word. Fascism is a post-religious ideology. No. I don't get your examples - they never, ever said that their objective was something religious. ISIS did and does. Your second point argues that since they attack other muslims they are not muslims? If you talk to someone from ISIS, they will probably tell you that they are following the right interpretation. There is no right way to discern it, because the islamic world lacks a central authority like the papal one. And, to quote Sam Harris in his last interview: We can also look outside the Muslim world to see that mere injustice and inequality rarely produce such destructive behavior. Many countries in Latin America have legitimate grievances against the U.S. Where are the Guatemalan suicide bombers? Where are the Cherokee suicide bombers, for that matter? If oppression were enough, the Tibetans should have been practicing suicidal terrorism against the Chinese for decades. Instead, they practice self-immolation, for reasons that are totally understandable within the context of their own religious beliefs. Again, specific beliefs matter, and we deny this at our peril. If the behavior of Muslim suicide bombers should tell us anything, it’s that certain people really do believe in martyrdom. Let me be very clear about this: I’m not talking about all (or even most) Muslims—I’m talking about jihadists. But all jihadists are Muslim. If even 1 percent of the world’s Muslims are potential jihadists, we have a terrible problem on our hands. I’m not sure how we deal with 16 million aspiring martyrs—but lying to ourselves about the nature of the problem doesn’t seem like the best strategy.EDIT: Fascism is not a post-religious ideology. In fact, fascism is referred to as 'imperfect dictature' because it didn't depose the King of Italy and Mussolini signed a specific pact with the Pope (Patti Lateranensi). One of the mottos of Fascism was 'Dio,Patria, Famiglia' (God, Homeland, Family) - fascism wanted religion to be part of it, or at least be solidary with it. It is in no way a post-religious movement. I think the important nuance here - and what he means by facism being a "post-religious" ideology - is that while facism may use religion as a tool to strengthen its hold on society, to discipline people into a rigid way of thinking, the core parameter used by facism to group people into categories is not religion, it's race. To an Italian facist of the 30s, a catholic Pole was inferior to a catholic Italian, because the former isn't Italian. Contrarily, in religion-based idologies like the one ISIS is displaying, what separates people is religion : to a jihadist, a fellow follower of the IS is an equal because they are Sunni Muslims, even if they have different passports or different skin colors. But that's not totally true - for example, there were Italians that gladly went to Spain to join Franco's fight. But I am confused because I think you switched my position and Nyxisto's?
Fair enough, political views like facism were sometimes above racial considerations.
As for your positions, I don't really know, what I can say though is that facism can be considered a "post-religious" ideology (if by post religious you mean "not centered on religion"). And I think we can all agree that "Islamo-fascism" is a word that makes no sense no matter which way you try to bend it.
|
http://www.n24.de/n24/Nachrichten/Politik/d/7913230/rheinberg-sagt-karnevalszug-wegen-fluechtlingen-ab.html
A couple of pages back i was wondering what Karneval this year will look like.
Turns out, smaller cities start to cancel it, like Rheinberg in this case. Because Rheinberg is one of the central refugee camps, they fear that what happened on NYE could happen again. Since they can't guarantee safety - no carnival for Rheinberg.
How ridiculous. We're now at the point where we have to cancel public parties because immigrants/refugees might run rampant. Now, lets see who will blame the town for that move, rather than admitting that the whole situation completely went out of control, but nonetheless - ridiculous.
Especially when the tactics of terrorists, suicide, attacking other Muslims, children, women and so on go completely against even the most archaic interpretation of scripture.
Ever heard of sharia law? Might wanna read up on "Hudud".
|
On January 15 2016 05:48 OtherWorld wrote:Show nested quote +On January 15 2016 05:30 SoSexy wrote:On January 15 2016 05:17 OtherWorld wrote:On January 15 2016 04:54 SoSexy wrote:On January 15 2016 04:13 Nyxisto wrote:
No I think the historical materialist perspective is absolutely correct. No one would go around and consider the IRA insurgency to be rooted in Christian traditions or consider the Nazis to be pagan warriors. This weird spiritualism that always occurs when people analyze foreign conflicts is ridiculous.
Especially when the tactics of terrorists, suicide, attacking other Muslims, children, women and so on go completely against even the most archaic interpretation of scripture. There's nothing religious about terrorism. Islamo-fascism is a very silly word. Fascism is a post-religious ideology. No. I don't get your examples - they never, ever said that their objective was something religious. ISIS did and does. Your second point argues that since they attack other muslims they are not muslims? If you talk to someone from ISIS, they will probably tell you that they are following the right interpretation. There is no right way to discern it, because the islamic world lacks a central authority like the papal one. And, to quote Sam Harris in his last interview: We can also look outside the Muslim world to see that mere injustice and inequality rarely produce such destructive behavior. Many countries in Latin America have legitimate grievances against the U.S. Where are the Guatemalan suicide bombers? Where are the Cherokee suicide bombers, for that matter? If oppression were enough, the Tibetans should have been practicing suicidal terrorism against the Chinese for decades. Instead, they practice self-immolation, for reasons that are totally understandable within the context of their own religious beliefs. Again, specific beliefs matter, and we deny this at our peril. If the behavior of Muslim suicide bombers should tell us anything, it’s that certain people really do believe in martyrdom. Let me be very clear about this: I’m not talking about all (or even most) Muslims—I’m talking about jihadists. But all jihadists are Muslim. If even 1 percent of the world’s Muslims are potential jihadists, we have a terrible problem on our hands. I’m not sure how we deal with 16 million aspiring martyrs—but lying to ourselves about the nature of the problem doesn’t seem like the best strategy.EDIT: Fascism is not a post-religious ideology. In fact, fascism is referred to as 'imperfect dictature' because it didn't depose the King of Italy and Mussolini signed a specific pact with the Pope (Patti Lateranensi). One of the mottos of Fascism was 'Dio,Patria, Famiglia' (God, Homeland, Family) - fascism wanted religion to be part of it, or at least be solidary with it. It is in no way a post-religious movement. I think the important nuance here - and what he means by facism being a "post-religious" ideology - is that while facism may use religion as a tool to strengthen its hold on society, to discipline people into a rigid way of thinking, the core parameter used by facism to group people into categories is not religion, it's race. To an Italian facist of the 30s, a catholic Pole was inferior to a catholic Italian, because the former isn't Italian. Contrarily, in religion-based idologies like the one ISIS is displaying, what separates people is religion : to a jihadist, a fellow follower of the IS is an equal because they are Sunni Muslims, even if they have different passports or different skin colors. But that's not totally true - for example, there were Italians that gladly went to Spain to join Franco's fight. But I am confused because I think you switched my position and Nyxisto's? Fair enough, political views like facism were sometimes above racial considerations. As for your positions, I don't really know, what I can say though is that facism can be considered a "post-religious" ideology (if by post religious you mean "not centered on religion"). And I think we can all agree that "Islamo-fascism" is a word that makes no sense no matter which way you try to bend it.
I don't know how it doesn't make sense. If you look at Nazism as a sub-species of Facism, and Facism as mostly having the following traits:
* Authoritarian Regulation of Economics
* Authoritarian Regulation of Social interactions
* Militaristic Nationalism
* Oppression of Minorities
* Indoctrination (typically of the youth) and forming hyper-loyal groups to police the state
* Rejection of Communism
There is nothing in that is incompatible with the goals of ISIS, the Ayatollah, etc except that Communism isn't perceived as a severe threat to those countries at the moment, but certainly communists would be imprisoned if they became active.
|
Sexy and Nyxisto are both right. Marx analysis of the religion is brilliant and spot on, and it's true that it is a reaction to a misery. But at the same time, ideologies and institutions, that Marx usually overlooked (or at least he underplayed their role, even within an economy) have their own life. It's true that south america have serious grievance towards America, but their institutions and ideologies are different and doesn't produce the same reaction. Meanwhile, the arabic world has had an history of imperialism, it is proud, and has a tendancy for cultural dominance (look at the spread of islam in the VII and VIIIth century, or even slavery in the arabic world that lasted for 13 centuries).
Look how the black community reacted to centuries of slavery in the US, it is the most brilliant and moral response to domination that any people ever made. They surely found this reaction - the valorization of theirselves without the resentment, the desire to move on and the capacity to ally themselves with people with different colors - in their own institutions, ideologies and history.
To resume, Nyxisto is talking about the cause, Sexy about the mean.
|
On January 15 2016 06:26 cLutZ wrote:Show nested quote +On January 15 2016 05:48 OtherWorld wrote:On January 15 2016 05:30 SoSexy wrote:On January 15 2016 05:17 OtherWorld wrote:On January 15 2016 04:54 SoSexy wrote:On January 15 2016 04:13 Nyxisto wrote:
No I think the historical materialist perspective is absolutely correct. No one would go around and consider the IRA insurgency to be rooted in Christian traditions or consider the Nazis to be pagan warriors. This weird spiritualism that always occurs when people analyze foreign conflicts is ridiculous.
Especially when the tactics of terrorists, suicide, attacking other Muslims, children, women and so on go completely against even the most archaic interpretation of scripture. There's nothing religious about terrorism. Islamo-fascism is a very silly word. Fascism is a post-religious ideology. No. I don't get your examples - they never, ever said that their objective was something religious. ISIS did and does. Your second point argues that since they attack other muslims they are not muslims? If you talk to someone from ISIS, they will probably tell you that they are following the right interpretation. There is no right way to discern it, because the islamic world lacks a central authority like the papal one. And, to quote Sam Harris in his last interview: We can also look outside the Muslim world to see that mere injustice and inequality rarely produce such destructive behavior. Many countries in Latin America have legitimate grievances against the U.S. Where are the Guatemalan suicide bombers? Where are the Cherokee suicide bombers, for that matter? If oppression were enough, the Tibetans should have been practicing suicidal terrorism against the Chinese for decades. Instead, they practice self-immolation, for reasons that are totally understandable within the context of their own religious beliefs. Again, specific beliefs matter, and we deny this at our peril. If the behavior of Muslim suicide bombers should tell us anything, it’s that certain people really do believe in martyrdom. Let me be very clear about this: I’m not talking about all (or even most) Muslims—I’m talking about jihadists. But all jihadists are Muslim. If even 1 percent of the world’s Muslims are potential jihadists, we have a terrible problem on our hands. I’m not sure how we deal with 16 million aspiring martyrs—but lying to ourselves about the nature of the problem doesn’t seem like the best strategy.EDIT: Fascism is not a post-religious ideology. In fact, fascism is referred to as 'imperfect dictature' because it didn't depose the King of Italy and Mussolini signed a specific pact with the Pope (Patti Lateranensi). One of the mottos of Fascism was 'Dio,Patria, Famiglia' (God, Homeland, Family) - fascism wanted religion to be part of it, or at least be solidary with it. It is in no way a post-religious movement. I think the important nuance here - and what he means by facism being a "post-religious" ideology - is that while facism may use religion as a tool to strengthen its hold on society, to discipline people into a rigid way of thinking, the core parameter used by facism to group people into categories is not religion, it's race. To an Italian facist of the 30s, a catholic Pole was inferior to a catholic Italian, because the former isn't Italian. Contrarily, in religion-based idologies like the one ISIS is displaying, what separates people is religion : to a jihadist, a fellow follower of the IS is an equal because they are Sunni Muslims, even if they have different passports or different skin colors. But that's not totally true - for example, there were Italians that gladly went to Spain to join Franco's fight. But I am confused because I think you switched my position and Nyxisto's? Fair enough, political views like facism were sometimes above racial considerations. As for your positions, I don't really know, what I can say though is that facism can be considered a "post-religious" ideology (if by post religious you mean "not centered on religion"). And I think we can all agree that "Islamo-fascism" is a word that makes no sense no matter which way you try to bend it. I don't know how it doesn't make sense. If you look at Nazism as a sub-species of Facism, and Facism as mostly having the following traits: * Authoritarian Regulation of Economics * Authoritarian Regulation of Social interactions * Militaristic Nationalism * Oppression of Minorities * Indoctrination (typically of the youth) and forming hyper-loyal groups to police the state * Rejection of Communism There is nothing in that is incompatible with the goals of ISIS, the Ayatollah, etc except that Communism isn't perceived as a severe threat to those countries at the moment, but certainly communists would be imprisoned if they became active.
Stopped right there.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
