The Good News is God is Dead(Inclusive of Socialism) -The Public Square Still Exists. Life Continues As It Did Before God.
I contend they were all socialists the only thing which differentiated them is the degree of certainty.
Marx gave us some very good insights into culture how it evolved in time and space given the relative resources, technology and knowledge in situ.
Trouble is completely juxtaposed to his Darwinian approach Marx determined there was such a thing as a Holy Grail toward which culture was inexorably heading, a utopian balance where everyone would have their ‘fair’ share. Marx had just created another ‘opium’ for the masses – another vehicle for priesthood to maximise their and the cultural institutions of socialism/communism access to scarce resources to support and justify their continued existence.
This necessarily requires delineating the priesthood as the holders and defenders of the sacred texts from adherents and anyone who challenged such a construct as Other. In this case the fascists, rightist, third columnists, whatever name is and was convenient at the time.
Socialism is a cute name change from Communism, the same as Protestantism versus Catholicism.
All have shown a propensity when enough political critical mass was attained to do as all cultures do.
Misunderstood? “..she stormed away saying the socialists had killed her grandparents.” And the Socialists did kill her Grandparents. How did it come to this? This doctrine of care for Other perverted by its adherents. Trouble is an adherent cannot pervert the very thing that created their behavioural variance in the first place. The same thing as claiming a child gave birth to their mother.
Trouble is for dogmas of certainty Other are heavily qualified and in the case of religions and dare I say the secular reflections women. If you have Other determined as less or qualified in any way in your foundation codex – you will I assure you kill again if given enough political power and you have not removed such determinations of Other.
My view is culture if left to its own devices tend, as individuals, to seek maximise their power and access to scarce resources so as to enhance their survival in time and space. Drift to fundamentalism and to enhanced feedback mechanisms which focuses on advancing the culture as an institution rather than the individuals which reside within.
The individual adherents rather than realising their own potential in life become servants, slaves to a cultures institutional hierarchy who proclaim loudly they have the individual adherents interests at heart whereas it is their own access to scarce resources and relative power they wish to preserve within an constricting cultural construct. This I proffer goes for both the religious and the secular based cultures.
Nietzsche exposition on religion can be just as well applied to Marx’s vision of the ‘good’ culture. As we have seen in Marx’s vision played out on the ground.
Marx should have taken note of his own determination of dogmas of faith (religions)“Religion is the sigh of the oppressed creature, the heart of a heartless world, and the soul of soulless conditions. It is the opium of the people” - Marx
What is the ‘answer’ to the human condition – there is no ‘answer’. There is no one cultural construct religious or secular which will enable a flourishing life. To be so certain there is is to end up ‘killing her grandparents” again and again.
Why? Because Marx was right in time and space the relative resources, technology and knowledge in situ change and inform different relationships by which cultures function to ensure survival and continuation. Marx, although I understand Marx had the best of intentions in creating a ‘good’ world, I believe ignored his own findings. Because Nietzsche was right in time and space, it becomes all about the preservation of the priests and their institutions the ‘grandparents’ their inevitable victims.
Just a few of examples of how the priests work to obtain scarce resources for the stated 'benefit' of their adherents to enhance their own control of power and access to even more resources as time goes by. It is 'all' about controlling process and resources which includes knowledge which may impact unfavorably on their grip of power and wealth.
Control of resource: Wealth
"To the jaded eye political parties might increasingly seem ends in themselves. This is at the core of the reaction to discussion over political funding and disclosure, writes Jonathan Green.
Have we been labouring under a misapprehension?
The major parties have determined that $1 a vote would be suitable reimbursement, a boost to their coffers of more than $50 million on current figures."
"Politics increasingly leaves us hoping for better" ABC's Jonathan Green Updated Thu May 30, 2013 8:27am AEST
Control of resource: Knowledge
"In the email obtained by The Australian, Mr Greenberry accused the nation's first Greens minister of giving false information to parliament about his allegations."Your assertion in the house that all my serious complaints have been dismissed by the Integrity Commission are false," he wrote. "They did not investigate the matter of me being asked to supply incomplete budget figures for the government."
"WHISTLEBLOWER Allan Kessing may have been wrongly convicted after critical information was withheld from his defence lawyers and never presented to the jury."
Allan Kessing in 'wrongful conviction' BY:CHRIS MERRITT, LEGAL AFFAIRS EDITOR From: The Australian March 04, 2011 12:00AM
"A maverick bureaucrat has angrily accused the Federal Government of concealing vital bulk- billing data.
Health Department official Mark Smith told a Senate committee yesterday the Government had perpetrated a "clear corruption of our democratic system" by stopping the release of quarterly bulk-billing figures for each federal electorate."
'Unethical': Abbott gets blast at Senate hearing The Age By David Wroe Canberra December 10, 2004
"Mr Rubenach is optimistic that voters in Herbert will realise that asylum seekers are not a threat to our security, but simply people fleeing violence and persecution.
“The current scare campaigns are based on fear not facts," Mr Rubenach said."
ASYLUM SEEKERS NO THREAT TO SECURITY The Greens(Australia) 1st August 2010 3:43 pm
Ministers in dark on terrorist asylum seeker for eight months The Age Date June 5, 2013
'at the extreme end of the spectrum(consistant Muslim behavioral variance) are terrorists.. And we have to put it on the table and be honest about it.'
Hitler’s views as to the nature of Other: moral pestilence, poison, despoilers, germ- carriers in poisoning human souls, shameful, fabricators, falsehood, cunning and despicable, derogatory, evil, cold-blooded, thick-skinned and shameless, alien race, evil spirits, absurdity of their teaching, obstinacy, tricks of logic, falsehoods, evil counsellors, perfidy, etc
Mohammed’s views as to the nature of Other: “rejecters of Faith!” Deaf, dumb, and blind, they are the fools, in utter darkness, deceive themselves, their hearts is a disease, make mischief therein and shed blood, transgressors, Be ye apes, despised and rejected., ignorant (fool)!, illiterates, do nothing but conjecture, God's curse is on them for their blasphemy, sold their souls, in insolent envy, wrong-doers, idolaters, perverse, blasphemers, buyers of (magic), evil-doers, in schism, wrong, wickedness,.. etc
Hitler MEIN KAMPF -no use even trying they are evil and therefore unable to see the 'truth': "But a Jew can never be rescued from his fixed notions."
''How futile it was to try to win over such people with argument, seeing that their very mouths distorted the truth, disowning the very words they had just used and adopting them again a few moments afterwards to serve their own ends in the argument!”
Mohammed QURAN -no use even trying they are evil and therefore unable to see the 'truth: 002.006 As to those who reject Faith, it is the same to them whether thou warn them or do not warn them; they will not believe.”
002.010 In their hearts is a disease; and Allah has increased their disease: And grievous is the penalty they (incur), because they are false (to themselves).
002.015 God will throw back their mockery on them, and give them rope in their trespasses; so they will wander like blind ones (To and fro).
002.018 Deaf, dumb, and blind, they will not return (to the path).
002.269 He granteth wisdom to whom He pleaseth; and he to whom wisdom is granted receiveth indeed a benefit overflowing; but none will grasp the Message but men of understanding.
Hitler MEIN KAMPF - permission to kill Other: “In my opinion the most culpable .. those who did not think it worth while .. placing his seducer and corrupter against the wall.” Etc
Goebbels (Nazi propaganda Minister) "The Jews are guilty! The Jews are guilty!" .. "We have nothing to contribute to it, it will come by itself, because it has to come." ...
003.004 Then those who reject Faith in the Signs of God will suffer the severest penalty, and God is Exalted in Might, Lord of Retribution.
Words and sentences are not strung together in foundation codex for no reason they are there to inform and justify action - there is no God in the world to enforce 'grievous harm' or 'severest penalty' so inevitably who gets the job done? Who is getting the job done based on these very real constructs straight from the Muslim texts to inform Muslims actions. Clearly Muslim terrorists are not perverting Islam it has and is perverting the Muslim adherent.
The facts is any notions of 'no compulsion to impose Islam on Other should be a comfort to Other are made ludicrous not only by the fact the Quran text itself informs the adherent compulsion in trying to convert is an exercise in futility because God is the one who determines who are granted the gift of 'understanding' and determines the Other as deaf, dumb and blind ignorant illiterates, the clear actions against Other on the ground throughout history have shown such words 'no compulsion' as an utter lie in practice.
Where are the Other in Saudi Arabia? What happens to Other when Islam assumes political power? We are seeing it played out all over the world - yet the political elite such as David Cameron, Julia Gillard, Obama, .. are lying about the inevitability of increased bloody schism based on a lie between Islam and Other. Tony Blair can see this very clearly as what is occurring and why.
Also the notion of Islam not authorising the killing of innocents invariably leaves out of the quoted text, the qualifiers, which are situated right in the middle of the quoted text. More importantly the definition of what are 'innocents' as defined by the Quran itself as can be seen just by the very few examples above do not include 'rejectors of the faith' - and clearly the actual victims of terror 'rejectors of the faith' can and does enable a very broad interpretation of who these rejectors may be.
Ok I have just finished the 'normal' diatribe against Islam - stated the obvious which appears to move nothing, fails to inform a rational public response - hundreds of thousands since the seventh century have no doubt said as much with as many more victims having to suffer the reality the Islamic text informs from generation to generation - as we are seeing on our own streets.
The mere fact humanity even start to consider compulsion, non-compulsion, killing innocents, not killing innocents as foundation codex textual authority, (even if it was completely unqualified which the Islamic codex clearly is not), deeming Islam is not to blame is itself a proof inherent compulsion of Other and killing of innocents exists within the Islamic construct of Other and is informing such acts in reality otherwise there would be no need whatsoever for such words to be used.
Why is this true? An engineer designs a vehicle as a cultural designer designs the traditions, rituals and relationships with adherents and non-adherents, the first fuelled with a chemical accelerant the second by ethics.
In the case of a motor vehicle the primary function is achieving the required degree of momentum to go from point A to point B, the problem is you have to stop at point B you therefore invent a brake. The brake has to be able to counter the inherent force, mass and acceleration effectively so the vehicle will stop at point B and not plough into a group of innocent pedestrians.
The engineer tests the brake by taking the vehicle out on the road to test how effective the brake is, generally on a test track away from innocent pedestrians. Alas we do no have this luxury with cultural constructs. The question you ask yourselves what are the underlying ethics which then enable such an engineer to justify putting a vehicle on the road with brakes which simply do not work in reality?
The fact the engineer points at the design manual, the ultimate authority, and informs us see the brakes have been included, who are we to disbelieve there it is written down, given the vehicle continues to plough into innocent pedestrians - everyday.
More importantly why couldn't the engineer design something else of benefit which did not need brakes at all? There would be no need to mention brakes in the design manual, the ultimate authority - no innocent pedestrians would ever have to be mentioned in the risk analysis nor would it enter anyones mind such a thing would be possible. But it is in the Islamic Quran.
It is not rocket science Islam is killing humanity and subjugating women. F=ma with illusionary brakes=innocent pedestrians have been continually killed since the seventh century - it is still happening everyday. The US simply did not exist in the seventh century - Islam continues a tradition of defining the enemy Other.
The the amazing position we have come to is the Left has forgotten the very reason for the Age of Enlightenment and humanity have so called Right wingers lamenting the fact the Left have forgotten what Freedom actually means and yearn for the day when the Left were at the barricades defending Freedom rather than destroying it.
Knowledge is power and shaping it the political elite - Although it is said the pen is mightier than the sword clearly history shows the mightiest swords own the pens.
The good news is God is Dead(inclusive of socialism)-The Public Square still exists. Life continues as it did before God.
The measure of an individual’s capacity to achieve a flourishing life is dependent on the length, depth, and breadth of the Public Square and the capacity to exist within without fear or favour to experience the warmth of the sun in the day and survey the vast expanse of stars of the night secure in the knowledge you matter.
The challenge set for humanity is to define the attributes of such a Public Square which would enable a flourishing life, understanding the determinants of what ‘flourishing’ means has to be continually negotiated and renegotiated within the Public Square whilst the primacy of ‘without fear or favour’ strictly enforces non-violence as authority to enter and participate.
Any culture which inherently contains violence against Other and determination of women as less within its consistent cultural behavioural variance has therefore to change its cultural foundation codex genetic and textual authority to participate.
Therefore society based on such precepts determine the individual as opposed to the culture secular or religious within which they reside as the focus. Culture is there to serve the maximised capacity of the individual to flourish rather than the culture itself. Although it may appear to be a paradox as culture defines the individual and informs the nature of the individuals existence and behaviour, it is the capacity of the culture to change tradition and not rely on tradition as the prime basis for informing meaning for an individual adherents life in the face of changing circumstance and particularly new knowledge primarily derived from education, health, social, and individual psychology research.
Culture therefore rather than hard-coding tradition as giving meaning for life seeks to reflect continually on the worth of traditions within a changing resource and knowledge landscape and adapt tradition accordingly. Tradition clearly plays a role in connecting past to present to future to give a degree of relative certainty as to where one exists in time and space but it is the relative degree of certainty historically cultures have imbued their traditions in terms of forming beliefs which is will and has been the cause of so much horror.
The Public Square is necessarily an ethically agreed space where cultural relativism only applies in limited form to the ideas feeding into the negotiation and renegotiation of Public Square ethics. Limited by ‘without fear or favour’, race and gender equality, not equal but different equal on all levels the filter.
The trick is how to keep the priests at bay and come to the point where we just can’t remember why we needed them in the first place.
Multiculturalism VS "Age of Enlightenment" - Reflection on Labor Party Greens alliance Attorney-General Dreyfus response to Senator Brandis.