|
|
xerox
Promising
Undefeatable Hero
|
posted February 21, 2014 09:36 PM |
|
Edited by xerox at 21:41, 21 Feb 2014.
|
I absolutely agree that there is a problem with relating everything to the West. Many Muslim rulers in the late modern period have specifically tried to emulate the West and it has not worked very well. Instead of trying to force "westernization" on a public which would not accept much of it, they should have focused on the preconditions for industraliztion. Of course there would still be conflicts with the traditional, there always is with change, but it would have resulted in a much more natural process of not westernization, but modernization within a culturally anchored context.
mvassilev said:
Even if the culture and values were the same, they'd still have plenty of reasons to fight.
The political and cultural issues intersect. In these countries, there exists a withspread feeling of foreign depedence. It is political through the imperialism of both Soviet and the West. It is cultural through the forced westernization which has alienated the public from their rulers.
____________
Over himself, over his own
body and
mind, the individual is
sovereign.
- John Stuart Mill
|
|
Baklava
Honorable
Legendary Hero
Mostly harmless
|
|
posted February 22, 2014 12:39 AM |
|
|
I read Maalouf's "The Crusades Through Arab Eyes" a few months ago. Quality work, dynamic and professional at the same time. +1 for Artu's advice.
____________
"Let me tell you what the blues
is. When you ain't got no
money,
you got the blues."
Howlin Wolf
|
|
mvassilev
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted February 22, 2014 04:14 AM |
|
|
|
artu
Promising
Undefeatable Hero
My BS sensor is tingling again
|
|
posted February 22, 2014 08:10 AM |
|
|
|
The Crusades Through Arab Eyes is also a wonderful read.
|
|
Fauch
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted February 23, 2014 03:58 AM |
|
|
Quote:
Of course people have more time to themselves as a result of technological advances. They no longer have to wash their clothes by hand, clean up after their horses, etc. Life may be faster in the sense that people do more different things in one day, but that's irrelevant because now they can do more things they enjoy, instead of having to work so much. If you're spending a long time cooking, cleaning, gathering food, etc, you obviously don't have much time for yourself.
though duration of work diminished in the last décades, I heard that it increased with industrialization, despite the massive production gains should have given us more leisure time. also, the current monetary system forces us to always make more money or the system will collapse and companies need bigger and bigger profits to survive, which means people have to work more and more.
also, maybe in the past you spent a lot of time cooking, cleaning, gathering food, etc... but you did it for yourself. now you mostly work for others since working for yourself apparently has no economic value.
|
|
mvassilev
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted February 23, 2014 04:23 AM |
|
|
I'm not sure what the effect of Industrial Revolution was on work hours. Productivity gains don't necessarily give more leisure time, although they can - it depends on workers' preferences. On one hand, being paid more can induce people to work more, since each hour is more rewarded. On the other hand, it raises people's income, and so reduces the relative value of additional income. How these two effects interact determine what happens to work hours when wages rise.Quote:
also, maybe in the past you spent a lot of time cooking, cleaning, gathering food, etc... but you did it for yourself. now you mostly work for others since working for yourself apparently has no economic value.
Sure, but what difference does it make? One way, you make it for yourself, the other, you do something for somebody else, while they do something for you.
____________
Eccentric Opinion
|
|
Zenofex
Responsible
Legendary Hero
Kreegan-atheist
|
|
posted February 23, 2014 07:40 AM |
|
|
|
There's one mammoth-sized difference and it's called wealth (re)distribution.
|
|
Fauch
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted February 23, 2014 02:57 PM |
|
|
mvassilev said:
Sure, but what difference does it make? One way, you make it for yourself, the other, you do something for somebody else, while they do something for you.
for someone else. I was talking about economy, not friendship.
|
|
mvassilev
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted February 23, 2014 06:04 PM |
|
|
So workers aren't compensated for their labor? You go to work and don't get paid?
____________
Eccentric Opinion
|
|
Fauch
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted February 23, 2014 07:57 PM |
|
Edited by Fauch at 20:51, 23 Feb 2014.
|
nah, I thought you meant they are working for you in return.
giving money really don't feel like doing something for someone else imo.
also, to be exact, you usually don't really get paid for your work.
usually, your bank account gets credited, which means that you don't actually receive money but you have a claim on the bank's money.
|
|
xerox
Promising
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted February 23, 2014 10:58 PM |
|
|
aren't checks still commonly used in the US?
____________
Over himself, over his own
body and
mind, the individual is
sovereign.
- John Stuart Mill
|
|
Fauch
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted February 23, 2014 11:22 PM |
|
|
|
does it make a difference? you still use them to credit your bank account no?
|
|
kayna
Supreme Hero
|
|
posted February 24, 2014 06:03 PM |
|
Edited by kayna at 18:08, 24 Feb 2014.
|
Baklava said:
I read Maalouf's "The Crusades Through Arab Eyes" a few months ago. Quality work, dynamic and professional at the same time. +1 for Artu's advice.
Sounds like a book that is filled with roughly the same amount of falsehoods and dubious claims than the westernized version of the crusades. Or perhaps, hmm... Perhaps the best way to try to fool a smart reader would be to point out the wrong parts of the westernized version without elaborating on the muslims' own faults? In the people's court, where you try to earn the people s opinion, the one countering an argument has an advantage... well, if you even have the chance to counter those said arguments. The way you approach a subject counts by a lot, and I tend to mistrust even experts with 7 + years of studies if they studied a very popular subject, because if those "experts" dont do their jobs in a way, they can lose their jobs and be replaced by another.
Example. You are a psychiatrist with 7 years of study. You realize that some mental illnesses are bogus and it's part of a government mass control ploy. You know that prescribing anti psychotics to 7 years old is absolutely cruel. You yap your mouth about it? Suddenly you lose your credentials, and voila, 7 years of study down the drain.
Apply the same to historians, both from the western world and muslim world.
It's why I rarely let myself be impressed by someone with more education than I do. Although listening to them is always interesting, just like reading that pro muslim book surely helps shedding a light upon the pro western crusade history.
But anyways.
Why are you guys talking about economy without mentioning primary, secondary, tertiary sectors? This "economy' would do just fine if we didn't work as much ; they often try to create new needs and catch people in those needs, yeah. and make us work that way. But why would you think that making us work in the tertiary sector is a need? Did you guys ever travel to a poorer country where people are still fed and they don't seem to work as much? We dont 'need' people in the tertiary sector, all we need are health related folk like doctors, cleaning related folk like white blue collars whatever, keep buildings in shape, herd animals for their meat, farmers to grow crops, make clothes and transport stuff. Missing a few here and there, but every thing else is completely optional.
I suppose one point is to keep us preoccupied with that extra, needless work load that often wears the guise of tradition, also to make our citizens smarter in many field, which can lead to new breakthroughs, which leads to an increase in power, to remain dominant? ... I don't think a few bosses making more money because he has more workers is really the point.
|
|
mvassilev
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted February 24, 2014 06:14 PM |
|
|
And so we'd live like people in pre-modern times. Does that sound at all appealing?
____________
Eccentric Opinion
|
|
Baklava
Honorable
Legendary Hero
Mostly harmless
|
|
posted February 24, 2014 06:32 PM |
|
|
Quote:
Sounds like a book that is filled with roughly the same amount of falsehoods and dubious claims than the westernized version of the crusades. Or perhaps, hmm... Perhaps the best way to try to fool a smart reader would be to point out the wrong parts of the westernized version without elaborating on the muslims' own faults?
Sounds like you didn't read it.
____________
"Let me tell you what the blues
is. When you ain't got no
money,
you got the blues."
Howlin Wolf
|
|
kayna
Supreme Hero
|
|
posted February 24, 2014 07:26 PM |
|
|
mvassilev said:
And so we'd live like people in pre-modern times. Does that sound at all appealing?
I'm sure we could live in a more beautiful world, where there wouldn't be so much concrete all around and harmless species dying just because we released chemicals in rivers and such. All I'm saying is we evolved in some ways, and regressed in others. And we could only evolve and not regress in other ways but that is a riddle only a child can answer correctly, apparently. We certainly could live with half our consumption of petrol, folk would have to live closer to their work place n stuff. How is it that we can get a house, a second one on the country side, cars with seemingly unlimited oil to fuel it, schooling for all our kids and all the fun stuff by being obese and taking in phone calls for some equally tertiary sector-ly company?
Baklava said:
Quote:
Sounds like a book that is filled with roughly the same amount of falsehoods and dubious claims than the westernized version of the crusades. Or perhaps, hmm... Perhaps the best way to try to fool a smart reader would be to point out the wrong parts of the westernized version without elaborating on the muslims' own faults?
Sounds like you didn't read it.
No, I didn't read it. But I did read about Mohammed starting out with 200 or so believers and today they are like 2 billions or something. I dont think the Jew holocaust was a joke, I dont think the 75 million or so American Indians all died by illnesses that were "accidently" brought over, and I dont really think Mohammed converted so many folk, from 200 to 2 billions, with only peaceful means.
Well, not everyone willing to take up arms to fight ( or fight back? ) is a crazy nut case, some of them have righteous anger. Some are gullible, some are looking for an excuse to dish out some pain, I agree... But some also lost relatives? Some had the feeling that after conquering so much, they were in danger of being soon conquered? What does the book says, that some of those Franks were barbarians? I can find you a muslim guy that drinks camel piss and says it s good to fight cancer in today's world.
But yeah, go ahead if you want to elaborate on that book, I'm listenin'. But no need bother reading it. I don't even take our current crusade story as an absolute truth, so I dont need to hear a counter argument either. It's all old stuff with most points having flimsy evidence. From 200 muslims to 2 billions and some folk becomes alarmed and takes up arms. Oh snow. What a surprise.
|
|
artu
Promising
Undefeatable Hero
My BS sensor is tingling again
|
|
posted February 24, 2014 07:58 PM |
|
|
|
Well, criticizing a book that you didnt read is quite an absurd position by itself but assuming people examine these things in a level of "who was evil, the crusaders or the Arabs, one had to be" is even more ignorant. Do yourself a favour and stop emberassing yourself by making assumptions out of propotion.
|
|
kayna
Supreme Hero
|
|
posted February 24, 2014 08:14 PM |
|
Edited by kayna at 20:15, 24 Feb 2014.
|
artu said:
Well, criticizing a book that you didnt read is quite an absurd position by itself
It is, in a sense, but a book that relates to genocides of millions of people without any propaganda in it, without word twists, without half truths, without ommited information? Such a thing even exists? lol!!!
artu said:
but assuming people examine these things in a level of "who was evil, the crusaders or the Arabs, one had to be" is even more ignorant.
I've never assumed his opinion to be black or white. Promise.
artu said:
Do yourself a favour and stop emberassing yourself by making assumptions out of propotion.
From 200 muslims to 1.5 - 2 billions of them was an interesting proportion to look at! But I see I've angered you a bit. Let me specify that I've never said I agreed or disagreed with the crusades, just that I wasnt surprised by their existence.
|
|
xerox
Promising
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted February 24, 2014 08:30 PM |
|
|
Ehm... I don't think any religion started out with millions of followers.
____________
Over himself, over his own
body and
mind, the individual is
sovereign.
- John Stuart Mill
|
|
Fauch
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted February 24, 2014 08:56 PM |
|
|
kayna said:
Why are you guys talking about economy without mentioning primary, secondary, tertiary sectors? This "economy' would do just fine if we didn't work as much ; they often try to create new needs and catch people in those needs, yeah. and make us work that way. But why would you think that making us work in the tertiary sector is a need? Did you guys ever travel to a poorer country where people are still fed and they don't seem to work as much? We dont 'need' people in the tertiary sector, all we need are health related folk like doctors, cleaning related folk like white blue collars whatever, keep buildings in shape, herd animals for their meat, farmers to grow crops, make clothes and transport stuff. Missing a few here and there, but every thing else is completely optional.
I usually make the distinction between real and financiary economy. yes, I think a lot of the work we do is useless, but not only in the tertiary sector, there is a lot of overproduction and also planned obsolescence. overall our work serves to pay for all the money that was created for financiary economy, and which will actually never circulate, but sit in the bank accounts of a couple extra-rich guys.
(basically, that's called national debt)
about tertiary sector, I think it's because people are too busy with their work and don't have time to do that stuff themselves, so it seems the "logical" solution was to make more people too busy by creating new jobs.
|
| |
|
|
This thread is pages long: 
