End the Scourge of White Supremacy

My mother was the proud Republican mayor of a city and she was always, always in favor of a woman's right to choose. I grew up in favor of women's rights.

I vote, but not for people I don't like or who advance views I don't support.

 

"to control , reward, and facilitate such production".
And you ignore the how, the why and the what of the public resources employed to create the priceless glories of that Isfahan mosque.

No dispute from me. That's a reflection, ultimately, of the dysfunctional US-centric organisations set up after WW2, such as the IMF and the WTO.

[!QUOTE]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.[/QUOTE]

Addressed above. The theft you are referring to arises ultimately from the lack of an international rules-based system.

Allowing barbarians to destroy Iran, as always...

Dogma? That charging interest on loans is not permitted in the Koran? OK. I'm not into dogma either.

But here's the thing. China's publicly financed private enterprise system is more successful in eradicating poverty than the West's privately financed model.

https://ellenbrown.com/2019/06/14/the-american-dream-is-alive-and-well-in-china/

BTW, the protests in Hong Kong ARE secessionist; they are demanding the overthrow of communism. That point was made clear today in a radio interview with a businessman in Hong Kong.

Meanwhile, protests in a southern US state have now been banned,

NOT JUST CHINA: As America’s Black Lives Matter rallies exceed their 30 day mark, The Intercept reports that the North Carolina city of Graham has banned protests for the foreseeable future, and threatened to arrest anyone who protests “without a permit”, as part of an effort to protect a Confederate monument that sits outside its courthouse.

So much for the much-vaunted freedoms of "democracy".

 

Agreed. At this particular time in history, English has primacy. And given that it is proving to express a multitude of divergent and convergent ideas, swirling in a sea seeking syntheses and it does that under the protection of free speech, what does it matter that it's a white persons language expressing white persons ideologies?

That doesn't answer the question.

 

White Supremacy has no place in any society period.

 

If I wasn't allergic to what you call "white persons language", my answer would be: It matters somewhat (not completely) as the language evolves and less as it goes through its own evolution and begins to express more divergent ideologies.

I am allergic to the the phrase "white persons language", however, because the phrase itself reflects a certain point in time in that evolution (rather recent) when certain things came to stand for more than they stand for in reality. Before then, the consciousness about what is called "race" (a concept which is a lot more sociological than scientific or biological) didn't exist in the same way. People were aware of some of the physical differences, talked about them at times, and sometimes used them to distinguish themselves from others. But they did it in a very different way before the 17/18th century than afterwards. This was true of those who wrote in English as it was of those who wrote in other languages.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_people

 

I don't ignore the how and why at all! In fact, that is what I accuse you of ignoring

When it comes to the use of public resources, on the other, I don't want to ignore that either. But since my 'ideal society' is neither in the pre-capitalist past, nor any of the capitalist or socialist ones since, to break it down here would involve a lot more patience for verbosity than I fear even the most patient poster could muster.

We agree. But I believe the evolution of the system to its present 'dysfunctional' state became worse when the dollar itself was no longer pegged to the 'gold standard'. I don't find returning to the "gold standard" the proper response to this factual observation nor the remedy I look for, but make that observation because the less constraints on the theft/fraud I have alluded to, the greater the need to peg the illusion of value of the US dollar based on the hegemonic power of its issuer and the less connection between this hegemonic issuer with those who do any real producing. The "master" is in that position because he has the most accumulated production, regardless that he isn't actually producing it. But also because he has the whip to make sure anyone who fall out of line is back in line. And as the master isn't even distinguishable by being more erudite compared to the slaves, the focus ultimately turns more and more the whip he controls.

More complicated than that. While an international system governed only by the rules of the jungle is even less tolerable, it is more honest than one where the 'rules' pretend to be something they are not.

I love this part of your message! Rings so true to me.

Well, leaving aside whatever 'interpretation' one may have of what the "Koran" actually says or doesn't, my main point is that I am not interested in scripture beyond those aspects of its mythology that help the path of enlightenment. And only those which fit our current, best, interpretation of what 'enlightenment" entails is what I would use to put under the label of any religion whose label you might still use. I am not focused on 'scripture' at all! And because the Persian "religious" tradition (a tradition that fused a myriad of non-scriptural influences to make the religion palatable for a non-Arabic speaking culture) is also very much influenced by non-scriptural things, to the extent the value of 'scripture' was only to encourage greater literacy, greater interest to find enlightenment, and better attempts to avoid dogma (including but not limited to) the very scripture that might have inspired some of it, to that extent Iran's religious tradition is actually a lot more profound and enlightened than many people realize. Too many people don't know about that tradition and rely merely on 'scripture' to understand things, looking on the rare occasions when the dogma of scripture might still have some resonance. Otherwise, as much as I have studied the philosophies, historiography and scholarship from the West, and found many good insights from them (including from America's founding fathers), there is still none that collectively comes as close to what I consider the path of truth against falsehood, and influenced by the light that emanates from that truth, than what I have found in the best from Persian scholarship and the poetry that often expresses those enlightened ideas. Get some of the dogma that persists in the "Persian tradition" as well out of the way, and I would be quite content with the kind of society that can be built around its ideas.

 

No doubt.

You are only repeating your assertion that fiat is an illusion. All money, whether backed by gold or not, is an "illusion".

Note: an international rules-based system requires an ICJ backed by a UNSC without veto. Just as rule of law within a nation requires a supreme court (without veto!!) backed by the nation's law enforcement. In either case, freedom of the nation within the community of nations (aka national sovereignty) or individual freedom of a citizen within in a nation, is subject to rule of law in the relevant sphere of jurisprudence (local, state, national international).

Re "honesty".....yes, honestly, at this stage of human development, most nations cling to the outdated notion of "absolute national
sovereignty". Hence the lack of a meaningful international rules based system.

Me too...but see above.

Well given your ideal society that is too complicated to explain, I can see you won't be interested in what Islamic law has to say about interest on debt.

 

It won't happen as long as the looting continues.

 

Yes. But:

I wasn't saying we can't have a better construct for the international rules based system. I just didn't want even the ones the Europeans like to promote to be confused with what it would look like if it was conceived on more appropriate grounds. Until I have the chance to see the one you like to propose in your message in practice, and see some of its contours better fleshed out in theory in the meantime, I won't judge it, except to say: it does look like it would be a huge step forward compared to either the rule of the jungle that we are now seeing or the 'rules based system' that arose after WWII.

 

First, and to be clear, I am not taking issue with "interest free debt" being good or bad, possible or not. That is a different issue, to be determined based on different methodology. I was taking issue with bringing "Islam" into the equation.

All documents and precedents that establish the 'fundamental laws' in a society, such as say the US constitution, have those who adhere to 'strict construction', those who favor "original intent", and those who see them as a "living document" susceptible to any interpretation they find enlightened, by their bevy of Platonic guardians.

The Islamic Law you capitalize has similar divisions among its adherents. None of them have quite the same philosophy as I do, but to give you an indication of some of the divisions, let me introduce you to aspects of Shia theological doctrine. The one that is enshrined in Iran's constitution as the official religion of the state.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ja'fari_jurisprudence

Even though Iran's constitution mandates that the clerics engage in continued "ijtihad", many of them ultimately are like "Sunnis" (traditionalists): they fall back on traditional interpretations and precedents. But a "mujtahid" in Iranian shia jurisprudence would be:

http://en.wikishia.net/view/Mujtahid

I have introduced you to Tusi a bit (if you read what I wrote): the Shia theologian who was also a mathematician, astronomer, philosopher, and more. The one who the "Tusi Couple" (which played a direct role in Copernicus being able to help usher the so-called Copernican revolution in the West) is named after. The same one who had a theory of evolution (both biological and spiritual) that predated Darwin by 600 hundred years. I can introduce you to the others too. For instance, Mulla Sadra Shirazi:
https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/mulla-sadra/

Like Sohravardi, and unlike so many 'theologians' of "Islam" that people like to associate with Iran, Mulla Sadra's name adorns many places all over Iran since the revolution, including one of the main highways in Tehran. And Mulla Sadra, in turn, was hugely influenced by Sohravardi:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shahab_al-Din_Yahya_ibn_Habash_Suhrawardi

p.s.
My point is this: "Islam" isn't for everyone a label that means the same thing.

 

My only interest in federal government is a smaller one. Since nobody else wants that, I have no one for whom to vote so I understand completely. If I did vote I would analyze what candidates do and ignore what they say.

 

That's good advice for local candidates, too.

 

I have in mind the system promoted in 1946 in San Francisco by 'Doc' Evatt, a former Australian high-court judge, who resisted adoption of the veto in the proposed new UNSC. His vision would have rendered inadmissible war as a means of dispute settlement between nations.

He was defeated by the great powers who did not wish to see their national sovereignty compromised in any manner. They issued an ultimatum to the delegates present - no veto, no UN Charter. Resulting in the fake 'rules based system' that you refer to.

(The Cold War soon became the dominant feature in global relations, with proxy wars being fought around the globe between the USSR and the US).

But human nature instinctively chafes at rule of law, even as the conscious mind realizes we need it to avoid anarchy.

Exhibit A: the current low-grade monstrosities calling themselves the 'boogaloo boys', who are referencing a civil war in the US....

The current boogaloo movement was first noticed by extremism researchers in 2019, when fringe groups from gun rights and militia movements to white supremacists began referring to an impending civil war using the term boogaloo, a joking reference to “Breakin’ 2: Electric Boogaloo,” a 1984 sequel movie about breakdancing.

Such is the path of humans to 'enlightenment'....

 

Agreed. At this particular time in history, English has primacy. And given that it is proving to express a multitude of divergent and convergent ideas, swirling in a sea seeking syntheses and it does that under the protection of free speech, what does it matter that it's the language of English expressing European ideologies

I am rather color blind myself, but most aren't, hence the reference to color. Culture is everything. Color is meaningless... [except in terms of vit D absorbtion] As an aside, white folks are more pinkish, than white, due to the blood moving through the dermis and epidermis. Nonetheless, I have modified the question. I look forward to seeing how you might avoid addressing the question... this time.

 

I think English is a fine language, precisely because it is 'proving to express a multitude of divergent and convergent ideas, swirling in a sea seeking synthesis". But the 'protection of free speech' would need to be more effective than it is now, the monopolistic forces (which are better able to use that 'protection' than those which might have countered their narrative in a less corrupted fashion) better constrained, and its ethnocentric origins less felt, for it to be as useful for the expression of all the ideas that can make for my vision of 'enlightenment'.

In the meantime, because of where scholarship has found its most important centers in modern times, and the fact that the English language best expresses many ideas from that scholarship, and maybe because I am proficient enough in the language, I have no problems with English being the lingua franca of our times. It looks better than any other alternative I can imagine.

But even if it is to occupy that role until a better candidate emerges, I don't think there is quite any language that I am familiar with that is quite as poetic and sweet as Persian when it comes to expressing insights that need to be expressed in formulas that go beyond the limits of reason and Aristotelian thought. While much of the scholarship from Iran, and by Persian speakers, used to be written in Arabic (the lingua franca of scholarly works in the Muslim world until westernization), and today it is often written in English, there is a wealth of knowledge (derived not just from the rational but the inspirational) and experience (of a people who have "been there and done that" for a long time, rising and falling and ruling and being ruled by some great empires) that can only be mastered if one is fluent enough in Persian. That is why, even when Arabic was the scholarly lingua franco of the Muslim world, it was Persian that was the cultural language of much of a swatch of territory that stretched quite far.

Arnold Toynbee, as quoted in the Wikipedia entry on Lingua Franca
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_lingua_francas

 

p.s.
One of Iran's greatest poets, Hafez (14th century Persian poet), once spoke to the reach of the Persian language beyond the areas mentioned by Arnold Toynbee, namely into the Indian subcontinent (where Persian was also the literary lingua franca and the language of government administration until the English took over), when he wrote this verse. And the difference between how this verse sounds in Persian and how it sounds even in good translation of it in English, is the difference in why somethings are simply "lost in translation".
https://www.thefridaytimes.com/the-persian-candy/

Persian poetry and literature, incidentally, has had some influence in European literature as well. The free translation of the Rubaiyat of Omar Khayyam by Fitzgerald became one of the classics in English literature. Goethe dedicated his Divan to Hafez, Ralph Waldo Emerson was an admirer of Persian poetry who wrote an essay on the subject to express his admiration, and Rumi (known better as Mowlana in Iran) has become one of the best selling poets in the United States and beyond. But translation can never truly capture the original.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Persian_literature_in_Western_culture

 

Fact: Systemic racism exists in the US, the police department, and government.

 

Immensely enjoyed this video. Thank you.

 

No it doesn't, it's an excuse for African Americans not to confront the violent criminality of their young men which is the real cause of their disadvantage.

 

Glad--he just passed away in May of this year.

 

And what is the source of this violent criminality?

 

Them. Racism does not force African Americans who are 13% of the population to commit 50% of the murders. Poverty does not force them to commit rape at double their percentage of the population. Only black people can help themselves;

http://www.politicalforum.com/index.php?threads/end-the-scourge-of-white-supremacy.573796/page-32

 

According to some black Professors I have been listening to a lot of the problem comes from the 80's and Regan where what had been a war against Poverty became a war against drugs and Blacks were particularly targeted. Whereas they might have had much the same amount of people proportionally smoking pot on other drugs they were in a minority but remain the majority imprisoned for such. This went with Privatisination of Prisons a quota of how many people must be in jail. When this started there apparently were 330,000 people in jail in the US. Now there are 2.4 million so to take one City which I have read about Chicago, needing to fill their jails by 90% the police took to planting drugs on people. They have been exposed for this.

Obviously the situation was bad, no jobs and a city tends to lead to high crime as it is but in Chicago in what I have heard the number one reason black people in jail is because of the very lowest crime for mariguana - possession. For this they get a long prison sentence. They have very long minimun sentences. They have to plea agree to this because if they choose a trial they will get an even longer one. When they are released from jail and due to Clinton, they cannot receive public housing and if their family live in public housing and led them stay they will probably be evicted. Hence no possibility of a home. They also cannot get a job because of their criminal record and then just to top it off they cannot claim benefits not even food stamps. Once they have been put in prison it is next to impossible not to go back in if they want to eat. There is a belief that this is deliberate and a way of warehousing blacks. Once in Prison they are again treated like slaves needing to work to make money for the jail. I have heard of one situation where people were refused parolle because the Private Prison needed them for a big job the prison had taken on. This looks very much like a new form of slavery. This is a very serious example of structural racism.

 

I disagree and agree, you're right that it seems the possession of crack cocaine was much more harshly dealt with than other drugs and this disproportionately affected the black community but at the same time other drugs simply didn't generate the same level of violence, gunfire became the leading cause of death amongst young black men at the height of the crack epidemic. RR, GH and Clinton locked these guys up and saved their lives by doing so. The only cure for black poverty is an end to black violence.
I doubt 90% of Chicago Police took to 'flaking', where did that stat come from?

 

Seems to me White Supremacy is inevitable in societies which are overwhelmingly White.