Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Strategies & Market Trends : 2026 TeoTwawKi ... 2032 Darkest Interregnum -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Ilaine who wrote (12854)	12/22/2006 11:27:49 PM
From: Maurice Winn	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 218132

CB, I don't buy the moral equivalency idea. The "grey ooze" theory of humanity is absurd but common. The idea that we are all the same is false. We are not all equally bad, or equally anything. Some cultures are hideously barbaric. Some are vastly superior, and that's in most ways one measures them. In absolute terms, nature measures success only by survival and all living things are alive so all are equally successful in that narrow measure of which culture is superior. But humans have ideas of ethics and morals and mutuality and have some understanding of gene pools. We are in the process of moving beyond no right or wrong, merely alive or dead [as per the era of conquest and genocide which dominated human existence since chimpoid days in the forests]. We are globalizing and integrating. <the working hypothesis I lately have been entertaining is that tribalism are so different from individualism that individualists can't comprehend tribalism, at all.> Individualists are universalists, who understand that there is a human gene pool and we are all in this together and the old tribal divisions by mountain range, river and desert are irrelevant to the modern integrated world. It's not that we can't understand tribalism, we reject it as an atavistic horror visited on humanity as part of natures process in creating communities instead of the way other mammals live - territorial hunter-gatherers who have a few females in tow. The very process of becoming human made us into genocidal tribes who could feature in later generations only by producing lots of children, out-breeding and defeating neighbouring tribes, killing competing males. We had to breed and we had to form huge and huger gangs with better and better technology and skills in defeating opposition, which meant producing lots of food and other necessaries to boost the population. Some cultures [Moslems] are still back in the conquering, superstitious, totalitarian mould. Others [Libertarians] are ahead of the game, waiting for the rest to catch up. Which is happening very gradually. Individualists don't think of themselves as self-sufficient islands, but more as self-determining nodes in a vast human pool of consciousness and material manoeuvres for mutual benefit. I don't think it's difficult to work out that bulk murder of children in Beslan, and Palestinian bombing of children on a school bus, are hideous compared with Jewish self-defence in blowing up a building containing a bloke hiding among others while he's planning and conducting more hideous attacks on Jewish children. It's ridiculous to call them equivalent. Jews do not deliberately murder bulk Moslem children with no other target among them. Palestinians do such things. Jews aren't human you see; as Borat showed in the Running of the Jew, Jewish women lay eggs, not babies. For TJ to compare Jewish self-defence and accidental killing of children, with deliberate murder of Anne Frank, and call them the same is disgusting. To call Jewish self-defence the same as Mengele's death-dealing cruel experiments on identical twins is hideous beyond belief. Which is what TJ does in comparing the two - even if he didn't mention those specific events. A further point is that the adults among those Palestinians killed, are very much in favour of death to Jews and obliteration of Israel, either by Fatah, or Hamas methods. That's why Hamas won the election so convincingly. So, it's not as though they are total innocents. The USA blew up Hiroshima, which was much the same ethically, but even less so as the proportion of innocents was vastly higher. It's not as though one can just wander up and get the one bad guy. Mqurice

To: Ilaine who wrote (12854)	12/23/2006 2:57:21 AM
From: TobagoJack	Read Replies (4) \| Respond to of 218132

<<Killing innocent Jews simply because they are Jews is morally worse than killing innocent Palestinians because they are physically adjacent to Palestinians who killed Jews>> ... is one way to frame a discussion. ... but, to keep matters much simpler, what happens when one side is killing to liberate space occupied a few thousand years ago, and another side is killing to liberate space occupied a few dozen years ago ? like, did the palestinians go around blowing themselves up to kill jews before palestine became israel? i think the most jews were killed by europeans, or so history book says so how far back do we go to determine cause and effect, morally right and spiritually wrong? again, no political statement, merely a question on otherwise obvious alternate motive that perhaps only the far away can observe