Society/Culture Why I blame Islam for the fact it's raining today....

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Joined
Mar 19, 2008
Posts
35,286
Likes
19,743
Location
Narre Warren North
AFL Club
St Kilda
Other Teams
.
I can't see one good counter argument to the premise that liberal democracies with mixed economies (anywhere from Reagan to Sanders/Whitlam) are the best forms of organisation we've developed.

But you're smart enough to know that we've been implementing it piecemeal for the last few centuries. And notions of 'we' are fairly loose; and almost irrelevant.

Do you see there are pockets with liberal democracies which want to take us back to the blood and honour and race stuff?
The counter argument is with the economies , which rely on growth.
Growth is not sustainable. Its slowing and will need to continue to slow.
Stuffed if i know a good non-growth system, maybe Stalin was right.
 

its free real estate

Premiership Player
Joined
Jul 30, 2018
Posts
3,379
Likes
4,141
AFL Club
Fremantle
I can't see one good counter argument to the premise that liberal democracies with mixed economies (anywhere from Reagan to Sanders/Whitlam) are the best forms of organisation we've developed.

But you're smart enough to know that we've been implementing it piecemeal for the last few centuries. And notions of 'we' are fairly loose; and almost irrelevant.

Do you see there are pockets with liberal democracies which want to take us back to the blood and honour and race stuff?
Liberal democracies may be the best form of political organisation and equally wholly undesirable for a large number of people on the planet. That’s the problem.

There have been three political projects of the past 40 ish years that have asserted liberal democracy as the natural end state for all cultures: neoconservatism, which asserts people can be made liberal through political reconstruction after regime change; neoliberalism, which asserts that people can be made liberal through trade, and multiculturalism, which asserts people can be made more liberal via absorption into a host liberal culture.

The first two have had notable failures, Iraq War and trade liberalisation with China, the consequences of each have led to a more illiberal world. Multiculturalism is more successful, but only for some immigrated cultures.

The question is, what if liberalism is only suited to a few cultures in the world, who happened upon it due to a series of path dependencies in history? And what if by assuming that liberalism is the natural end state for all cultures, it creates the conditions for its own destruction?
 
Last edited:

Soft Downhill Skier

2008-2010 wasn't me.
Joined
Sep 21, 2004
Posts
32,484
Likes
25,090
AFL Club
GWS
There have been three political projects of the past 40 ish years that have asserted liberal democracy as the natural end state for all cultures: neoconservatism, which asserts people can be made liberal through political reconstruction after regime change; neoliberalism, which asserts that people can be made liberal through trade, and multiculturalism, which asserts cultures can be made more liberal via absorption into a host liberal culture.

The first two have had notable failures, Iraq War and trade liberalisation with China, the consequences of each have led to a more illiberal world. Multiculturalism is more successful, but only for some immigrated cultures.
I partially agree with you here. Although I often divorce liberal democracy from capitalism. I think Iraq, NAFTA, opening up China were successful for many, and less positive for many more. Im sure you'd agree Gordon Gecko capitalism benefits those at the top more than anyone else.

IMO movements along the lines of the anti-segregation movement in the US has more explicitly sought liberal democracy as an endpoint.

The question is, what if liberalism is only suited to a few cultures in the world, who happened upon it due to a series of path dependencies in history? And what if by assuming that liberalism is the natural end state for all cultures, it creates the conditions for its own destruction?
The soft power of liberalism is always stronger.

There's lots of structural reasons preventing it from emerging in these parts of the world. Dictators, cultural influences that think Mohammed/Jesus are always watching. You'd agree that Western commerce would often hate if liberal democracy emerged in the developing world (Iran- 1953, Chile 1970). These are the roadblocks many western lib dems overcame centuries ago, and there is still some resistance.
 

medusala

Hall of Famer
Joined
Aug 14, 2004
Posts
34,424
Likes
5,862
Location
Loftus Road
AFL Club
Hawthorn
I wholly refute any premise that Europe is the shining light of liberalism.
lol

Who is then, Africa? Asia? South America?

.
Ultra nationalism is on the rise, and with it comes right wing populism and the usual results..
Step away from The Guardian.

.
Seriously. The UK, Ireland, and former British colonies (Canada, the USA, NZ and OZ, plus South Africa and so forth) have never slipped into out and out Fascism or similar, which I put down to a unique aspect of the Common Law and a strong independent Judiciary that supervise the Executive arm of government.
UK had Cromwell
South Africa had apartheid
Ireland was run by the Poms

NB you seem to have overlooked that those countries are predominantly comprised (ex SA but see above) of those with European ancestry.

Scandinavian nations are probably the other exception.
Those good old liberal Vikings
 
Joined
Mar 19, 2008
Posts
35,286
Likes
19,743
Location
Narre Warren North
AFL Club
St Kilda
Other Teams
.
lol

Who is then, Africa? Asia? South America?

.

Step away from The Guardian.

.

UK had Cromwell
South Africa had apartheid
Ireland was run by the Poms

NB you seem to have overlooked that those countries are predominantly comprised (ex SA but see above) of those with European ancestry.



Those good old liberal Vikings
The Irish got to Vote.
South Africa? Surely a country that was settled the way South Africa was, would have been foolish to offer those conquered a vote in an election. ( it was disastrous enough, and not just to the whites , when apartheid ended ).
I don't think the existence of Apartheid detracts from the statement Malifice made.
 

Total Power

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
Aug 19, 2004
Posts
26,052
Likes
7,069
Location
Grand Finals
AFL Club
Port Adelaide
Other Teams
Team Rafael Nadal
lol

Who is then, Africa? Asia? South America?

.
No one is. But Europe being a shining light? really? do you have any idea what France is doing to Africa (or has done) till today? The British atleast colonised countries and gave something back to the colonies, France did nothing of that sort. Views like these are I believe the problem. Unless you acknowledge the things that happened, you won't be able to move on. The way the empire treated the colonized would NOT be considered humane today. So let me repeat what I said in my comment, let us read our histories, acknowledge the shit that happened and apologize wherever apologies are necessary. The would definitely help.

I find it bizarre that the proceeds of 400 years of free labour is never mentioned as a contributing factor to the wealth of the uk. When it comes to slavery all I hear is "we stopped it". Get your hand off it.

The knowledge of our past is essential for human progress. It applies to personal and collective behaviour. It is not about guilt or accountability but rather the simple understanding of historical events and facts, glorious or shameful. You can deny their existence as much as you might find it convenient but these events are deeply rooted in our collective subconscious and we can hopefully move on and grow into better people.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Jul 30, 2018
Posts
3,379
Likes
4,141
AFL Club
Fremantle
No one is. But Europe being a shining light? really? do you have any idea what France is doing to Africa (or has done) till today? The British atleast colonised countries and gave something back to the colonies, France did nothing of that sort. Views like these are I believe the problem. Unless you acknowledge the things that happened, you won't be able to move on. The way the empire treated the colonized would NOT be considered humane today. So let me repeat what I said in my comment, let us read our histories, acknowledge the shit that happened and apologize wherever apologies are necessary. The would definitely help.

I find it bizarre that the proceeds of 400 years of free labour is never mentioned as a contributing factor to the wealth of the uk. When it comes to slavery all I hear is "we stopped it". Get your hand off it.

The knowledge of our past is essential for human progress. It applies to personal and collective behaviour. It is not about guilt or accountability but rather the simple understanding of historical events and facts, glorious or shameful. You can deny their existence as much as you might find it convenient but these events are deeply rooted in our collective subconscious and we can hopefully move on and grow into better people.
Slavery has been a feature of civilisation since it was created. Europeans did not invent slavery, and slavery still exists in many nations. The first civilisation to ban slavery was Catholic Europe.
 

Total Power

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
Aug 19, 2004
Posts
26,052
Likes
7,069
Location
Grand Finals
AFL Club
Port Adelaide
Other Teams
Team Rafael Nadal
Slavery has been a feature of civilisation since it was created. Europeans did not invent slavery, and slavery still exists in many nations. The first civilisation to ban slavery was Catholic Europe.
Where have i argued any of that? You are right but thr West, and particularly Anglos made it industrial. For instance, a Spanish slave could legally become free in their lifetime. And their children would be born free. People of all races could end up slaves. Or free. In American and Caribbean Anglo colonies, a slave would die a slave, and over the course of their lifetime they would be, along with their other slave duties, breeding machines for more slaves. And they were all black.

My point being no civilisation built on slavery is a shining light, hence i said "no one" is a shining light above like meds claimed it is.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Joined
Jul 30, 2018
Posts
3,379
Likes
4,141
AFL Club
Fremantle
Where have i argued any of that? You are right but thr West, and particularly Anglos made it industrial. For instance, a Spanish slave could legally become free in their lifetime. And their children would be born free. People of all races could end up slaves. Or free. In American and Caribbean Anglo colonies, a slave would die a slave, and over the course of their lifetime they would be, along with their other slave duties, breeding machines for more slaves. And they were all black.
Manumission existed in the US prior to slavery’s abolition. The problem was you could be kidnapped back into slavery on account of being black, but being kidnapped into slavery is an eternal problem.
 

Total Power

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
Aug 19, 2004
Posts
26,052
Likes
7,069
Location
Grand Finals
AFL Club
Port Adelaide
Other Teams
Team Rafael Nadal
Manumission existed in the US prior to slavery’s abolition. The problem was you could be kidnapped back into slavery on account of being black, but being kidnapped into slavery is an eternal problem.
The Catholic Europeans did it first was simply untrue. The Japanese hegemon Hideyoshi banned slavery in a set of laws between 1587 and 1590, about 250 years before "Anglos" banned it in Britain in 1833 and a full 301 years before "the West", in the form of the Brazil, finally banned it in 1888. We talk stuff that is sumple untrue in blatantly slanted British schoolbooks to deflect any "Anglo" blame for a European slavery that was considerably more severe than any that had preceded it.

Yes, the Brits were the first major European power to ban slavery, but they were also perhaps the major player in setting it as a systemic element in a global trade from which it profited like no other country, and came to ban it only when it was reaching the nadir of it's economic usefulness. It also compensated slave owners, giving some sense of legitimacy to their nefarious parasitism, as if it were merely a different point of view.

When people say slavery was universal and far from specific to European colonial societies, they ignore the historical record. When Cicero or Claudius are recorded as having secretaries who were loyal slaves, we are plainly talking about an entirely different kind of unpaid work. The fact that slaves could at that time contain among their number educated men is something of a hint that the kind of racialised chattel slavery practised by the European Empires, as well as the U.S., was an entirely different beast.

Additionally, it is worth noting that Hideyoshi's decision was a direct response to "Christian" Portuguese slave drivers selling his subjects into foreign and lifelong servitude, with Japanese women sold into sexual slavery as far away as Lisbon itself. Japan had slavery priorly and a caste system in the Edo period that followed but something about the European form of slavery appalled this otherwise very violent, and controlling man.

Shamefully, slavery reappeared in Japan in its period of fascist militarism, with POWs and colonial subjects used as slave labour to drive the Imperial war machine.
 
Joined
Jul 30, 2018
Posts
3,379
Likes
4,141
AFL Club
Fremantle
The Catholic Europeans did it first was simply untrue. The Japanese hegemon Hideyoshi banned slavery in a set of laws between 1587 and 1590, about 250 years before "Anglos" banned it in Britain in 1833 and a full 301 years before "the West", in the form of the Brazil, finally banned it in 1888. We talk stuff that is sumple untrue in blatantly slanted British schoolbooks to deflect any "Anglo" blame for a European slavery that was considerably more severe than any that had preceded it.

Yes, the Brits were the first major European power to ban slavery, but they were also perhaps the major player in setting it as a systemic element in a global trade from which it profited like no other country, and came to ban it only when it was reaching the nadir of it's economic usefulness. It also compensated slave owners, giving some sense of legitimacy to their nefarious parasitism, as if it were merely a different point of view.

When people say slavery was universal and far from specific to European colonial societies, they ignore the historical record. When Cicero or Claudius are recorded as having secretaries who were loyal slaves, we are plainly talking about an entirely different kind of unpaid work. The fact that slaves could at that time contain among their number educated men is something of a hint that the kind of racialised chattel slavery practised by the European Empires, as well as the U.S., was an entirely different beast.

Additionally, it is worth noting that Hideyoshi's decision was a direct response to "Christian" Portuguese slave drivers selling his subjects into foreign and lifelong servitude, with Japanese women sold into sexual slavery as far away as Lisbon itself. Japan had slavery priorly and a caste system in the Edo period that followed but something about the European form of slavery appalled this otherwise very violent, and controlling man.

Shamefully, slavery reappeared in Japan in its period of fascist militarism, with POWs and colonial subjects used as slave labour to drive the Imperial war machine.
Slavery had disappeared on the European continent before then, by around the time of William the Conqueror.
 

Total Power

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
Aug 19, 2004
Posts
26,052
Likes
7,069
Location
Grand Finals
AFL Club
Port Adelaide
Other Teams
Team Rafael Nadal
Slavery had disappeared on the European continent before then, by around the time of William the Conqueror.
I am not responsible for your intellectual laziness. A two second internet search brought up this article. Do some research before you speak of concocting history from thin air. That might be something your imperialist history books did. You aare being plainly disrespectful and wilfully ignorant on a public forum. Under your own name. Consider that for a moment.

https://www.japantimes.co.jp/cultur...as-slaves-by-portuguese-traders/#.WxznYtUvwy4
 
Joined
Jul 30, 2018
Posts
3,379
Likes
4,141
AFL Club
Fremantle
I am not responsible for your intellectual laziness. A two second internet search brought up this article. Do some research before you speak of concocting history from thin air. That might be something your imperialist history books did. You aare being plainly disrespectful and wilfully ignorant on a public forum. Under your own name. Consider that for a moment.

https://www.japantimes.co.jp/cultur...as-slaves-by-portuguese-traders/#.WxznYtUvwy4
Oh sweet Total Power, I have done my research. Not frantic googling in response to a discussion, but years of reading on the subject.

Slavery was abolished in Europe around the turn of the first millennium, and it was the first place in the world to abolish slavery.

It was only reintroduced on the discovery of the New World, and aided by the long running Islamic Slave Trade, which sold sub Saharan Africans to the Europeans.
 

Total Power

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
Aug 19, 2004
Posts
26,052
Likes
7,069
Location
Grand Finals
AFL Club
Port Adelaide
Other Teams
Team Rafael Nadal
Oh sweet Total Power, I have done my research. Not frantic googling in response to a discussion, but years of reading on the subject.

Slavery was abolished in Europe around the turn of the first millennium, and it was the first place in the world to abolish slavery.

It was only reintroduced on the discovery of the New World, and aided by the long running Islamic Slave Trade, which sold sub Saharan Africans to the Europeans.

But you don't actually read my posts, do you? Slavery is universal. I never said slavery was invented by the Europeans, i said, slavery was industrialised by them. That was never even part of any of these discussions that slavery wasn't common back then. I thought that was a granted. Transporting people across oceans and using them to produce cash crops- rather than necessary food or war materiel,as happened before- as chattel based an a philosophy that dehumanises them based on their physiognomic differences is not universal. It is specific. It started with Europeans.

Did the Arabs employ transported labourers across several continents for the sheer profit of cultivating and selling cash crop commodities? Not a rhetorical question;a genuine. I don't know, but I suspect not. Those market system lines led to the sea. I'm not sure the people along such routes were all Arabs, I'd be highly skeptical.

It never, ever occurred to Hideyoshi, strangely enough, to do such a thing. And he was a violent, paranoid nutcase. Nor did occur to the Chinese, the Koreans or even the Mongols, even though they all had the seafaring technology necessary. Just saying. He was also an exception, I guess. I hope everyone's sense of the European as inevitable agent of progress is affronted enough for this afternoon. "The white man made the world freer by banning slavery, my arse." Go read some history, folks.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Oct 2, 2007
Posts
32,550
Likes
25,991
Location
Perth
AFL Club
Carlton
Moderator #7,018
I find it bizarre that the proceeds of 400 years of free labour is never mentioned as a contributing factor to the wealth of the uk. When it comes to slavery all I hear is "we stopped it". Get your hand off it.
Hillariously Meds also thinks that the UK going it on its own will be good for the UK.

Last time I checked it's too expensive to make anything in the UK, and they dont exactly have an abundance of natural resources. Its only a matter of time before Scotland (and Northern Ireland) leave the Union (in Scotlands case, taking the one natural resource the UK has with them).

Signing their own death warrant there. It's there own fault for leaving the Germans (and to a lesser extent, the French) in charge of the EU I guess.
 
Joined
Jul 30, 2018
Posts
3,379
Likes
4,141
AFL Club
Fremantle
Did the Arabs employ transported labourers across several continents
Yes. And they still do.

Slavery is rampant in the gulf states. They kidnap little boys from Pakistan and Bangladesh to keep as sex slaves and camel jockeys in Saudi Arabia.

In August 1999, a four-year-old jockey from Bangladesh was found abandoned and close to death in the desert. In 2000, Anti-Slavery International reported the case of a four-year-old jockey from Bangladesh whose employer burnt him on his legs for under-performing. The boy was left crippled.​

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2001/jun/03/peterbeaumont.theobserver
 

Total Power

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
Aug 19, 2004
Posts
26,052
Likes
7,069
Location
Grand Finals
AFL Club
Port Adelaide
Other Teams
Team Rafael Nadal
Yes. And they still do.

Slavery is rampant in the gulf states. They kidnap little boys from Pakistan and Bangladesh to keep as sex slaves and camel jockeys in Saudi Arabia.

In August 1999, a four-year-old jockey from Bangladesh was found abandoned and close to death in the desert. In 2000, Anti-Slavery International reported the case of a four-year-old jockey from Bangladesh whose employer burnt him on his legs for under-performing. The boy was left crippled.​

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2001/jun/03/peterbeaumont.theobserver

That is human traffiking, happens in Europe and US too with women from CIS countries. It's different to what i was saying.

Here are some figures from EU. Look at forced labour numbers.

http://www.europarl.europa.eu/news/...n-trafficking-nearly-16-000-victims-in-the-eu
 

Total Power

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
Aug 19, 2004
Posts
26,052
Likes
7,069
Location
Grand Finals
AFL Club
Port Adelaide
Other Teams
Team Rafael Nadal
Hillariously Meds also thinks that the UK going it on its own will be good for the UK.

Last time I checked it's too expensive to make anything in the UK, and they dont exactly have an abundance of natural resources. Its only a matter of time before Scotland (and Northern Ireland) leave the Union (in Scotlands case, taking the one natural resource the UK has with them).

Signing their own death warrant there. It's there own fault for leaving the Germans (and to a lesser extent, the French) in charge of the EU I guess.
The evidence itself is damning. Dont want to derail the thread but the UK is losing 450 million pounds a week. All predictions point to a gloomy picture but still not enough to change their mind. I guess keeping the brown people out is more important, without realisng this got nothing to do with Brexit itself.
 

medusala

Hall of Famer
Joined
Aug 14, 2004
Posts
34,424
Likes
5,862
Location
Loftus Road
AFL Club
Hawthorn
It was only reintroduced on the discovery of the New World, and aided by the long running Islamic Slave Trade, which sold sub Saharan Africans to the Europeans.
Wasnt just the Mohammedans who sold them slaves, the locals did as well.

Hillariously Meds also thinks that the UK going it on its own will be good for the UK.

Last time I checked it's too expensive to make anything in the UK, and they dont exactly have an abundance of natural resources.
Poor old Mal, another immolation effort.

1) UK has a cheaper cost based than places like France and Germany due to lower taxes and lower labour costs and restrictions
2) Services account for about 80% of the UK economy.
3) The UK runs a non EU trade surplus but a large deficit with the EU, join the ...
 

Total Power

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
Aug 19, 2004
Posts
26,052
Likes
7,069
Location
Grand Finals
AFL Club
Port Adelaide
Other Teams
Team Rafael Nadal
Wasnt just the Mohammedans who sold them slaves, the locals did as well.
No one has denied that or argued that. Re-read my posts above. European culture is hardly a shining light for us all. Consider the French occupation in Africa, till date, France dictates the fortunes of 9 African countries. You seem to be pissed off with EU having a say in UK affairs, why don't you make a fair stand here and tell me the enlightenment Europe showered on Africa specially is terrible even today!

And British empire? haha please! 45 trillion stolen alone from the subcontinent which had 1/4th of the worlds GDP then. Read your history

https://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/o...j7EkJropmlFp4uFtRHENV-5ySmTLklAajRmCeYjxPft7Y


Save us from your culture of "enlightenment". I would pick many other places ahead of Europe, easily.
 
Joined
Oct 2, 2007
Posts
32,550
Likes
25,991
Location
Perth
AFL Club
Carlton
Moderator #7,025
1) UK has a cheaper cost based than places like France and Germany due to lower taxes and lower labour costs and restrictions
The UK havent made anything at home for literally ever. The Germans and French get around higher labor costs by making 'premium' items (BMW etc). The UK dont make shit anymore with almost all their once iconic brands now made overseas (Land Rover, Jaguar, Enfield all in India etc). Aston Martins are about the only thing still made in Britain that's on par with BMW and so forth.

If Im British, why am I making stuff in Britain, when its cheaper to make it in India or elsewhere (barring making premium quality stuff, and then im in competition with the Europeans)?

And how is leaving the EU going to help? Dont say 'no more EU regulations'. If you want to sell your shit you make in the UK to the EU you still have to comply with EU regulations anyway.

2) Services account for about 80% of the UK economy.
Which isn't exactly selling me on the 'leave' argument.

3) The UK runs a non EU trade surplus but a large deficit with the EU, join the ...
What exactly are you trading with an economy that is 80 percent services?
 
Top Bottom