End the Scourge of White Supremacy

So the problem remains: those black ghettos won't go away merely by "getting people in the ghettos to think differently"; though that is indeed part of the solution.

But so far you have not explained HOW to bring about this change in thinking, in the black ghettos.

 

On this particular point, let me say clearly: I am definitely more inspired by, and more interested in, the great art and architectural works before the modern era than what has been built since. Never mind the ugly architecture that totally dulls the spirit and which is associated with the Soviet Union and the communist bloc, but also what is built in the consumerist capitalist economies then or now. Even the best from it is merely interesting and the rest is mostly ugly.

But I also don't anyone here to be too "Eurocentric' either. Some of the most dazzling pieces of architecture are found outside of Europe. These are just a small sample from too many pictures to fit any thread or forum.

https://www.arch2o.com/beautiful-wonders-persian-architecture-5-cities-iran/

But it wasn't just places of worship that were more beautiful. Even 'utilitarian things' (such as bath houses, bridges, and public squares) were constructed with more artistry than what we have now.

https://iranparadise.com/chehel-sotoun/

 

No jobs are being shipped anywhere, we have lost our manufacturing jobs to robots, not immigrants.

No one opened any doors and no one is being offered handouts for votes. You have to be a citizen to vote in the US and becoming one is not an easy process nor open at all to someone who needs handouts. You need to get in touch with reality and stop listening to right wing fantasies

 

Interesting post

While you've probably read it already, may I recommend "The Seven Lamps of Architecture" by John Ruskin for your perusal if you haven't. You and he seem in substantial agreement on many things.

 

You said I was a leftwinger. That's made up BS.

Is your position so weak you feel a need to behave this way?

 

Thanks for introducing me to John Ruskin. I don't know enough about his views to know for sure, but from the little I learned about him since your post, I certainly think his views are ones I share. At least, in his recognition that so much of the beauty of the pre-industrial revolution age has not been replicated (despite the material wealth created) since the industrial revolution under capitalism. Nor, of course, was the beauty replicated by the state controlled economies of the Soviet bloc either. Not at all.

 

My position is simply that people should look after their own welfare rather than hoping someone else will fix their problems. It is advice I would give to anybody. Yes I referred to you as a left winger. It isn't anything I made up. It is an analysis of your political positions.

 

Cool avatar but...



Lynda Carter forever! (sorry Gal)

 

I taught students how to look after themselves, not just offered advice.

An incompetent analysis because it's wrong, and you did make it up because it isn't true.

I don't know if you can get this article from the Atlantic, but this is what Trump has done to the Republican Party...

"History Will Judge the Complicit," Anne Applebaum, The Atlantic, July/August 2020

https://apple.news/Al__dZnidS7iBkjiQiuWRfg

https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2020/07/trumps-collaborators/612250/

 

Unfortunately what you refer to "simple economics" is clouded by mainstrean economic orthodoxy which says governments don't have their own money, and that all money in an economy must be debt-based money.

It's a lie that private financiers and banksters want to maintain, so they can direct the benefits of economic production to themselves.

http://bilbo.economicoutlook.net/blog/?p=45314&cpage=1#comment-68564

...a good example of this increasingly observed syndrome is an article in The Australian newspaper today (June 30, 2020) by Adam Creighton – "Never forget that governments have no money" – it is always "our money" . This sort of journalism is becoming an almost daily occurrence as it becomes obvious that capitalism is now on state life-support systems and the extremities of government intervention are demonstrating very clearly what Modern Monetary Theory (MMT) economists have been saying – and the only ones that have been saying it – for 25 years or so.

An excellent read for anyone who wants to learn the intricacies of central banking, and the twists and turns and contradictions of mainstream economists on debt, deficits and government intervention.

 

You must be very young... You weren't around when America made things. Everything from textiles to televisions to steel. Not anymore...

 

Some of the modern architecture (European inspired?) in Beijing and Shanghai is very striking. The USSR spent its resources in a Cold War.

But a case could be made, I think, that the West and the ME has a tradition of magnificent architecture inspired by the 'divine', in association with power, that is not so evident in the East.

eg Karnak (Egypt), Persepolis (Persia) , Parthenon (Athens), Pantheon (Rome), Hagia Sophia (Constantinople), and so forth.

And those magnificent 16/17th century Persian examples are transcendental in their evocative power.

But don't forget: the most extensive national high-speed railway system in the world (China) also evokes admiration from those who experience it.

 

China. A racially homogeneous country marching toward the future while the paralyzed West is ripped to shreds from the inside... What a pity.

 

Don't forget: many people find beauty even in many weapons of war. All things that are produced are beautiful to the extent they shed on real enlightenment. The most beautiful things produced shed the most light on it. And those aren't either high speed trains, or sky scrappers found in Shanghai or Dubai. Those are things inspired by more than material interests. They are things that inspire the spirit.

 

Be careful where you are going with that...Einstein warned the war after the next would be fought with sticks and stones...

How was the destruction of much of the finest Christian/European art in WW2 part of the "enlightenment" journey?

And civil engineers can rightly claim to be participants in "enlightenment" when judged by some of their creations which may inspire more than mere utilitarian interest.

 

I am not sure why you address your points to me. It certainly doesn't seem relevant to what I had said. I wasn't extolling the virtue of 'weapons of war' so much as to remind you that there is elements of beauty even in the least beautiful things produced, as long as they show enlightenment. And I certainly have nothing to endorse or promote in what happened in WWII or otherwise in what you mention. In fact, the reverse: I have reason to worry about Iran's beauty being destroyed once more by hooligans. As it has so often in the past.

 

You wrongly make the mistake of thinking I care about the republican party or Trump. I am a non-partisan right wing nutjob who doesn't like Trump even though I do defend him because of how he is treated. Sorry Trump has destroyed your political party.

 

I address you owing to your conception of "enlightenment", and the conclusions you draw; eg, here you are saying beauty exists even in ugliness if it shows "enlightenment".

So who determines whether the ugliness is "enlightening"?

OTOH, most (I think) would concur that Albert Schweitzer's philosophy of "reverence for life" is enlightening .

I see a connection between your conception of "enlightement" on the one hand, and your proposition that the state cannot eradicate poverty, which is patently false - it's obviously a matter of choice by the ruling class since the resources exist to eradicate poverty.

Which is where we started quite a while ago, and which you have been dancing around for some time now.

 

I was responding to your comment regarding high speed trains in China and how some might find them beautiful too. I was suggesting to you that while there may be some beauty in technological marvels and achievements, even in the ones that are meant for very ugly things (like some weapon systems), ultimately the most beautiful things in life are those that lift the human spirit. Things which are even more enlightened, because they inspire us towards things beyond simply the material world. As some might put it, things which 'transcend you to the heavens, with their other worldly charms."

In the meantime, the material world is the world we know best and the one we need to master. I have nothing against mastering it and, indeed, believe we must strive to do so. In fact, what we learn doing so (and the disciplines that help in that endeavor) are part of the 'enlightenment' I speak of. But, at the same time, I will not be happy with a society that finds its definition of good and evil in merely the temporal, material, and ultimately the rather insignificant things. Those societies that have done so, will dull our spirits.

I just don't think your question is at all pertinent to what I am saying. At least, not in this context or the way you ask it.

I don't know about his philosophy so I can't comment on it.

My position on poverty is not at you have stated it to be. When it comes to 'resources', in the form of money, I have gone further than even you do. I have tried to tell you that I don't believe there is as much a constraint even in so-called "debt-financed" money for a country like the US to spend a lot more (a lot more) than it does to fight poverty. What I have questioned are other things, both things which have led you to think MMT is some revelation that can transform our understanding of economic forces. And things which are a lot more philosophical in nature on what ultimately constitutes a just society or an enlightened one.

Otherwise, within the present system, I actually favor universal health care. I do favor many other projects that could help fight poverty going more at the root of the problems (the proverbial teaching people to fish as opposed to giving them fish). But, fundamentally, none of that is going to produce a huge difference in addressing the core problems that exist, the way I see those problems.

There is nothing to dance around for me. On specifics programs, I might say this or that is fine or not. But on the fundamental issues, the changes I like to see are more fundamental ones too. They won't be about trying to divide the pie better for a short time.

 

You edited this part of your post and turned your previous question into a statement about what most people would agree with. I have heard of the name Albert Schweitzer but don't know enough about the details of his philosophy to comment on it specifically. But the idea that we must 'revere life' is not exactly how I would phrase it. To be sure, I share the sentiments of the 13th century Persian poet Sa'adi, when he wrote:


Or, put differently, I certainly accept that empathy for the fate of other humans is an important element in being really worthy of the name. But to 'revere' life (whether one's own or anyone else's) seems to take it farther than I would.

 

I have come straight to this point because ultimately we agree "the most beautiful things in life are those that lift the human spirit".

As I see it, this is where we digress.

I specifically stated "the resources exist to eradicate poverty". Full stop. Nothing about money.

Money is an illusion ie, while most people think it has value in itself, we both agree it is an illusion, but for different reasons. You say the illusion is based on the US reserve-fiat-currency ponzi maintained by US hegemony.

I say the illusion is maintained by the lie that government cannot issue non-interest bearing money, alongside debt-based money of the private sector.

Btw, as someone with inside knowledge of Islam, the concept of interest-free debt should be readily appreciated by you.

Now, we have already had the debate on what is "wealth" which is not illusory - , so no need to traverse that again.

And I can look in wonder at that first picture above, that you posted.

 

I don't have a party because Hell will freeze over before I'll vote for anyone who would take away a woman's right to control her reproduction.

 

"They came first for the Nationalists, and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Nationalist. Then they came for the Christians, and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Christian. Then they came for the Conservatives, and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Conservative. Then they came for the Whites, and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Racist. Then they came for me, and by that time no one was left to speak up."

This just came to me this morning. My take on an old poem. Prophetic. Feel free to share...

 

1- I believe 'resources' derive from production arising from economic activity by people, influenced by the tools available, to control, reward and facilitate such production. We had this discussion before, but I don't think we got anywhere with it.
2- The resources available to the US extend to things produced, not just within its borders, but by others as well, through 'rewards' that arise from its control over paper money. The more the US consumes production beyond what it actually produces, the more it is robbing others. (While making many of its own population become unproductive, with those who have become unproductive, or others, lamenting the days when it was producing things).
3- The theft or fraud I allude to is not mitigated by government producing "digital money". Not that I consider the money you call "private sector" money tied to 'debt financing", much of a constraint either. That instrument already allows the theft I am referring to the same extent as what you imagine will occur from what you call "government issued' money. Without much interest either, as the interest rate on US bonds is not high at all.
4- I am not into dogma, regardless of covering or labels and, hence, the idea of "interest free debt" is no more (or less) attractive to me because of anything that might arise from "Islamic" teachings/prohibition regarding interest. Hence, that appeal won't work with me.

 

Like I said you are on the left. I disapprove of political parties and I don't vote at all since understanding that voting doesn't ever fix anything.