Author
|
Topic: RE: virus: The Democrofascists. (Read 834 times) |
|
Blunderov
Archon
Gender: 
Posts: 3160
Reputation: 8.90
Rate Blunderov
"We think in generalities, we live in details"
  
|
 |
RE: virus: The Democrofascists.
« on: 2005-08-07 03:37:06 » |
 |
[Blunderov] The most defining aspect of the Western "way of life", it seems
to me, is the principle of habeas corpus. Unsurprisingly, this is almost
always the very first principle that is dispensed with when Western
politicians find it necessary to defend their 'way of life'. That, or
freedom of the press; quite which principle dies first is usually a photo
finish.
We have seen banning of political parties and persons in Apartheid South
Africa. We have seen press censorship and house arrests in Apartheid South
Africa. We have seen detention without trial in Apartheid South Africa. And
we have seen many deaths in this detention, usually as a result of heavy
falls sustained 'accidentally', or in 'attempting to escape', or 'due to
suicide' or as in the case of Biko due to 'going berserk'.
Nobody seems to be asking the obvious question. What is it that the police
hope to achieve in 3 months that they cannot achieve in 14 days of detention
without trial? I will tell you; it is an administrative convenience for the
purpose of imposing it time after time after time. In South Africa it used
to be (after gradual escalations) 180 days without trial, renewable
instantly upon expiration. Some people spent years in jail with no recourse
to lawyers, families, friends, competent medical care, adequate nutrition or
any literature except a Bible. Not all of them remained sane or lived to
tell the tale. And now Democracy is coming to the UK.
As to this business of making it a criminal act to glorify or condone
terrorism. Harr harr. The very first time that Blair succeeds in defining
'terrorism' in such a way as to exclude himself I may stop laughing. At the
very least we may be sure that he will take it upon himself to define the
word in a way that serves himself.
We have seen this thing in the old South Africa too. It used to be an
offence to approve of terrorism or Marxism or communism or the ANC (who were
'defined' as communists anyway) or to possess or disseminate any literature
pertaining thereto. Not of course that it was ever necessary to prove any of
these 'offences' in court. That's what the detention without trial laws were
for. Earnest, well meaning, intelligent, fair-minded and trustworthy men
were assigned the task of administering them (in complete secrecy of course;
'national security' always demands secrecy) in such a way as to 'combat
terrorism'. Or communism. Or it's sub variant, Liberalism. Or more
generally, anything that, in the opinion of the secret men, was 'not good'
for 'national security'.
So; this is how we remove the threat to our 'way of life'; by giving it up
as fast as possible.
(My mother once remarked that any time you hear a person use the phrase 'I
had no choice', you may be reasonably certain that what they really mean is
that they didn't like the other one. I'm willing to predict that we will
hear quite a lot more of this false dichotomising in the future. Phooey.)
Best Regards.
Bush and Blair's "way of life"
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article9684.htm
<snip> None of the "enemies" has claimed that that he is against Bush or
Blair's way of life. Bush and company, however, have nothing other than
saying that this is a war on our way or life. </snip>
---
To unsubscribe from the Virus list go to <http://www.lucifer.com/cgi-bin/virus-l>
|
|
|
|
|
Kharin
Archon
Posts: 407
Reputation: 8.42
Rate Kharin
In heaven all the interesting people are missing.
|
|
Re: virus: The Democrofascists.
« Reply #1 on: 2005-08-08 14:04:09 » |
|
On the whole, I'm inclined to agree; I'm not sure that extended
detention is likely to be of any use and I doubt that terrorism can be
defined in any meaningful sense (certainly not so as to exclude those
that characterise this solely in terms of occupation and resistance;
very far from being only muslims). Equally, experience from Northern
Ireland suggests that heavyhand state security measures act as
effective recuiting techniques for extremists. The entire point of
liberalism is to find a way to avoid such eventualities.
On the other hand, liberalism does typically require some acknowledge
that differing communities are willing to co-exist and this is far
from necessarily being the case in many European countries at present.
More below.
> <snip> None of the "enemies" has claimed that that he is against Bush or
> Blair's way of life. </snip>
While Bush and Blair have an obvious interest in downplaying the clear
political factors at play, the fact does rather remain that this
statement is simply not correct. This is a very pertinent example:
http://www.prospectmagazine.co.uk/article_details.php?id=6992
"Butt: The idea is that Muslims in Britain need to keep to their
Islamic identity and work for the re-establishment of an Islamic
caliphate, or khalifah as they would say, based upon the first four
caliphates of Islam.
Taseer: Where?
Butt: In the Muslim countries. That is one of the differences I had with them.
Taseer: You would like to see the caliphate here too?
Butt: Absolutely. How could we restrict something that initially
started in Medina but then spread through the entire Muslim world?"
It seems fairly clear to me that to deflate complex issues down to
political considerations alone is not an adequate account of matters,
important though such considerations are.
My own feeling is that I would have more confidence in attempts to
defend a British way of life if I could hear an explanation of what is
being defended. Britain, more than any other Western country I can
think, has almost no meaningful sense of national identity or values.
Compare to France, which has certainly been fairly draconian in some
of its laws from expulsion of Imams to banning of hijab. The latter is
certainly not a very liberal measure but it is a legitimate attempt to
defend French values of autonomy and secularism. When one considers
the contiinued policy of state-funding for religious segregation in
education (including funding for muslim schools) I increasingly think
the French policies are rather more sensible.
---
To unsubscribe from the Virus list go to <http://www.lucifer.com/cgi-bin/virus-l>
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Blunderov
Archon
Gender:
Posts: 3160
Reputation: 8.90
Rate Blunderov
"We think in generalities, we live in details"
|
|
RE: virus: The Democrofascists.
« Reply #3 on: 2005-08-09 17:11:09 » |
|
[Blunderov] Hi Jonathan. Like your blog - I've RSSed it.
Yes, I thought K's comments balanced and informative. I will say though, to
be charitable to Abid Ullah Jan, I thought he must have meant those enemies
who had carried out actual attacks against the West and also communicated
their reasons for them. Otherwise, yes, it does seem quite obviously untrue.
I have myself seen hotheaded British Muslims proclaiming the coming
Caliphate of the UK on TV and there are plenty of others who proclaim the
eventual conquest of the whole world by Islam. (Let us not forget though
that there are plenty of Christian fundamentalists who feel similarly
inclined to world domination.)
Although I am not in favour of either of these worlds, I will say that, to
Islamite eyes, the Western program of 'democratization' must look very
similar to the way their Global aspirations for Umma appear to us; very
threatening. And rather hard to distinguish substantively from any previous
crusades.
Let us hope that our fearless leaders are reserving their fatuous clichés
for public consumption only whilst privately concentrating their best minds
on a somewhat deeper appraisal of the situation. On the face of it, this
does not appear to be the case. So far they have been, it seems to me, doing
a very creditable job of fighting fire with gasoline.
Maybe, though, if the price of oil goes up high enough the war will go out.
Best Regards.
Jonathan Davis
Sent: 09 August 2005 16:33
Interesting thread this fellows. Very interesting comments from you K. Just
wanted to toss in my full agreement with you.
---
To unsubscribe from the Virus list go to <http://www.lucifer.com/cgi-bin/virus-l>
|
|
|
|
|
simul
Adept
Gender:
Posts: 614
Reputation: 7.87
Rate simul
I am a lama.
 
|
|
RE: virus: The Democrofascists.
« Reply #4 on: 2005-08-19 11:27:13 » |
|
> (My mother once remarked that any time you hear a person use the phrase
> 'I had no choice', you may be reasonably certain that what they
> really mean is that they didn't like the other one. I'm willing to
> predict that we will hear quite a lot more of this false dichotomising
> in the future. Phooey.)
Most likely what they really mean is that the other choices *required too
much effort*. Laziness (sloth) is a cardinal (and secular) sin, that
swiftly leads to corruption. I'd say it's responsible for much of the
decline of many an empire.
I've had my highs and lows. Each low is triggered by a prior success
leading to a glut and a period of demotivation followed by a search and then
a renewed motivation. In me it's typically not excessive. So far.
This is a typical cycle. If the highs (motivated) are extremely high and
the lows (demotivated) are extremely low, we call it manic-depressive
disorder (in people). In a town we call it "boom and bust".
This cycle also occurs on a country-wide scale, but the consequences can be
devastating.
In some ways, extremes of success should be *avoided* - since they can lead
to longer periods of down-time and a risk of running into a depression
cycle.
The internet boom and bust could have triggered a depression. Some say it
was narrowly avoided. I say we still aren't sure that it hasn't occurred.
Are people as motivated as they once were? Are Americans inspired to be
creative?
---
To unsubscribe from the Virus list go to <http://www.lucifer.com/cgi-bin/virus-l>
|
First, read Bruce Sterling's "Distraction", and then read http://electionmethods.org.
|
|
|
|
Logged
