Sir Bandelot

Easy now! No need to get excited... No I don't support Islamicization of society, not at all. Nor do I fear it. There is always some pressure from fundamentalists, of any stripe to try to remove our freedoms. My view is more one of cultural acceptance and tolerance, within broad confines that protect individual rights. If I don't want to be a muslim, the law will protect me from that. In regards to this memo, I don't think it's being enforced. It's a recommendation to be considerate. But people should be allowed to eat in front of muslims, if they insist on needing to do that. No one should be forced not to eat. I expect Muslims are quite used to it by now, living in a society where Ramadan is not publicly enforced. More likely that moderate muslims (the huge majority) don't really care if they see others eating during their Ramadan. But what is interesting or even disturbing is how things like this provoke a response in some people who fear that it represents making concessions to Islamic fundamentalism, as though being considerate to people of other cultures means we must somehow become them. That's patently false but shows intolerance is on the rise, mainly by people who are reactionary. What next, get a gun?

Not really. You think the competitors won't jump on this in short time? Of course they will, wherever their is money to be made. I can't even get paid from my employer, unless I have a bank account. Indeed, it has come to the point that no man may buy or sell, lest he have an account... or the number of an account. To lead a normal life, we must remain entrenched in the system. One would have a hell of a time trying to step outside of it. Vagrancy is an option, of course. Vagrancy... the final form of protest

Well, the OP asks us what we consider to be hypocrisy. One thing that comes to mind is, posters who snipe the ideas of others from the sidelines, but are unwilling to give any of their own. I mean in general, beyond this thread, in any thread. Now you mention 'ignore', my view is, it's better not to put anyone on the ignore list. One thing you will learn from this forum if you survive is how to deal with others who seek purely to be antagonists. How not to get upset over them, not to take things personally. Whatever does not kill me makes me stronger, as the saying goes. So let them show themselves as simple, weak fools, seeking self-confirmation in condemnation of others, if that's all they want to do. They are just as guilty of the same crimes as they claim for their very reason of being. Hypocrisy? Yes, indeed, let them eat their own guts out. For we, Hyperboreans, it matters not.

Any time you talk to him... wear rubber boots

I hope that it brings about something of real value, as the system is in desperate need of reform. They need to avoid making "Trotsky-esque" references tempting though they may be, lest they become their un-doing.

I'm waiting to hear those ideas.

Here we go again... is that you Bob? It might as well be. My view is that the old way of suppressing human cultural identity in public by the government, or in the workplace for the sake of production needs to be done away with. It's just another form of control, with an agenda all of its own. This is part of the forced equality that attempts to promote monoculture. The ultimate outcome of such government enforced secularism on a people is, communism. In some countries people are already being forbidden to wear certain clothes in public, for no other reason that to enforce monoculture, eliminate uniqueness. These are the old "new ways". The new new ways must embrace the rights of individuals over the collective, allow humans beings the right to express themselves from the viewpoint of their religion, culture, heritage. Even in the workplace... we are more than simply units of production to allow wealth to trickle up to some otherwise abstract concept such as a business corporation. The best workplaces will be the ones that have a 'quiet room', where employees can take a break and find themselves for a while, through prayer, meditation or what have you. Even just a place to stretch out and have a nap. The "humanity room", it could be called. The role of government as authority over the individual needs to be suppressed. NOT human culture needs to be suppressed. The rights of the individual, which is a tangible thing, finite and mortal, must be protected and cherished above all. That should be the greatest role of government.

Being misunderstood is a daily ritual...

What do you mean? Does this new charge replace other, already existing fees?

I'm going to keep on doing my thing, you do whatever gets you your jollies. That's the way it works.

Exactly, I completely agree with this attitude. We cannot compartmentalize people into two categories because there are so many variations and exceptions. Even when we say "conservative", we need to be clear whether we mean political, moral/ ethical, or environmental. And so on. Having said that, I view "partisans", those who adhere to dogma as among the most primitive types there are. One must consider every issue on its own merits, using intelligence.

Yes, you are...

CitizenX, I was TALKING ABOUT B_C

It is far easier to snipe at others from behind the scenes, rather than risk saying anything yourself that might put you under point of attack. It is also very cowardly.

I did not mean political conservatives. But there might be a connection. I meant people who believe in maintaining certain traditional views. If we accept that faith means holding on to ones beliefs even when they are challenged by new ideas, then people of faith must necessarily believe in tradition. Turning to the political spectrum, the "right" side always represented the side of the loyalists. Those who were loyal to the king, who upheld tradition and wanted to keep the old ways. They were... conservatives. And thus the association of Christian conservatives with the right wing. Also, in some of my recent readings related to another topic I came across the Right Hegelians, which I thought was interesting. So yes, I am prepared to say that people of faith, religion, are more conservative than people who are atheists. Not convinced? Go ask the Pope. IE the keepers of faith, the priests, most certainly are NOT Liberals. You mentioned what you think is not progress. I agree, and it's part of the reason why people of faith may want to resist such 'progress'... because it really isn't progress at all. Quite a lot of things we may consider to be innovations, that might make life easier, are not necessarily good in the long run. If we but have the eyes to see what the future holds, and what comes out of the tangled web we weave when we seek to innovate... we seek to control, to dominate. To be superior over nature, to take from it what we want. As though somehow, we are separate from it. MH gave a link about the perceived evils of agriculture. I did not read the link, but suspect that this is what it's about.

But one has to really grasp the point of the conservative mindset. It is NOT about progress. It is in fact a resistance to progress. Certain kinds of progress, anyway. And it does so intentionally.

A person having faith does not require a logical proof. Faith is a firm belief, even when reason and facts dictate otherwise. To the purely rational thinker, faith seems illogical and is a waste of time. But the power of faith must not be discounted. Faith provides a mechanism that goes beyond the boundaries of reason, and this can be very powerful. Human beings empowered with faith can sometimes achieve seemingly super-human results. Faith overcomes fear of limitations, because it removes fear of death.

Not trying to 'blame' anyone. Just pointing to certain facts, as the discussion turned to the origins of the christian right wing. As I said, these issues do go back throughout history. But it is the resurgence of the religious right that is of interest now, and televangelism played an important role in organizing large numbers of people. Maybe you can educate us further with a more detailed post, instead of your habit of flitting around pointing out the specs in other people's eyes. Not that it bothers me, but I know you've got more than this addled pate' of yours. We'd all like to learn...

Further to this is the role of leftism and its association with atheism. Leftism is associated with rejection of Monarchy and the church, and promotion of atheism. For example, the philosophy of Marxism contends that religion is a negative human development that must be eliminated: In the Marxist-Leninist interpretation of Marxist theory, religion is seen as negative to human development, and socialist states that follow a Marxist-Leninist variant are atheistic and explicitly antireligious. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Communism_and_religion Therefore Communist countries were atheist states, with an active agenda to completely eliminate religion in countries where communism took hold. And that invokes all the imagery associated with fear and loathing of the left, during a time when the Soviet union represented a threat to the freedom of all mankind. (See Communist International) Historically "right wing" has meant adherence to traditional power structures while leftism is seen as a departure from tradition. Politicians have used these perceptions throughout history to manipulate the masses in order to obtain power. The return of the right wing is a backlash against cultural degeneracy and shortsightedness on the part of centrists and liberal movements that ignored/ underestimated the power and influence of conservatives.

It depends what is meant by "start with". There were predecessors of course, but Robertson had developed a huge religious following and demonstrated how to use his flock for political ambitions. He did not succeed but showed that a potential large voter base was there, mainly in the southern bible-belt where people were highly conservative and opposed to northern hippie/liberal culture. Falwell took it to the next level with his 'moral majority'. I agree that it came to Canada through US media. People living in western and central Canada are similarly conservative christians, and no doubt were tuned in to Robertsons TV and radio broadcasts. The '700 club' was shown on Canadian TV. Soon Canadian copy-cat evangelists appeared with strong affiliation to the US leaders. '100 Huntley Street' is one example. Preston Manning is another.

I'm no expert but I believe this really goes back to a few very popular pastors in the US, namely Pat Robertson and Jerry Falwell.

If Obama got mouthy, here's what he would do: http://www.ticketsofrussia.ru/photos/gov/putin/judo2.jpg

Yeah but Putin has a black belt in judo.

Agreed... the great powers now commit their sins by proxy. As do we, by living within it! Not opposing this, makes us the greatest hypocrites

I think USA is like 5th in the world for state executions. At the top with China, among others such as Saudi Arabia, Iran, North Korea, Yemen, Libya. Some mighty strange bedfellows, for the land of the free. At least the US does not employ slave labour... yet