Announcement

Collapse

Welcome to Moorcock's Miscellany

Dear reader,

Many people have given their valuable time to create a website for the pleasure of posing questions to Michael Moorcock, meeting people from around the world, and mining the site for information. Please follow one of the links above to learn more about the site.

Thank you,
Reinart der Fuchs
See more
See less

Arab Psychologist

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #1
    I think that's been around for a while - Remember seeing this about 3-4 months ago.

    Some interesting opinions however.
    Batman: It's a low neighborhood, full of rumpots. They're used to curious sights, which they attribute to alcoholic delusions.

    Robin: Gosh, drink is sure a filthy thing, isn't it? I'd rather be dead than unable to trust my own eyes!

    Comment


    • #2
      Originally posted by TheAdlerian
      Here's a video by an Arab psychologist that says a lot about why supporters of the war are correct:

      http://switch3.castup.net/cunet/gm.a...050wmv&ak=null
      So, the cluster bombs, the thermobaric (fuel/air) bombs and the white phosphorous, being dropped on villages and towns, are they being used by the 'primitive', or the 'civilised' side, at the moment?

      Does the Arab-American psychologist lady mention the 'civilised' side economy's junkie like obssession with OIL and related fossil fuels, by any chance?

      Comment


      • #3
        Originally posted by TheAdlerian
        Are you implying that 3 or 4 month old news is ancient history in this wacky fast paced world of ours!
        When it comes to events in Lebanon and Gaza, certainly. A bit of a nose-dive for things 'civilised' and 'rational'.

        Comment


        • #4
          Originally posted by TheAdlerian
          So, you support oppression?
          What kind of question is that?


          In reply, here are some similiarily obtuse questions (I'll let you choose your favourite):
          So, you support mass murder?
          So, you support Global Warming?
          So, you support Global catastrophe?

          If it weren't for the fact that the West thinks it needs to control ALL of the Middle East's fossil fuel energy resources, we simply wouldn't be having this despicable Neo-Imperialist meddling in the region and the countries of Middle East would have been left to go their own way, undistorted by said meddling.

          Comment


          • #5
            I am not sure we are in the right topic but :

            - Israelians have killed people and burned villages .. ( Deir Yasin for instance )

            -Chrisitians have killed and burned and opressed in the name of god

            From my point of view, whatever their true wrongs, Palestinians are the opressed people ....

            Comment


            • #6
              - Israelians have killed people and burned villages .. ( Deir Yasin for instance )

              -Chrisitians have killed and burned and opressed in the name of god

              From my point of view, whatever their true wrongs, Palestinians are the opressed people .

              When the speaker says it is not a conflict beetwen civilisation but beetwen democracy and rights of mankind, she is right.

              But the dividing line is not which she believes.

              1) Fundamentalist chrisitian and jews are not on the side of freedom, equality and rights of mankind . For instance in international meetings about statute of women, all religious leaders agree to fight any progress.

              2) Western governements are not always on the side of democracy (euphemism).

              China who is not a democracy, supports Iran who is not one .......

              Geopolitics are often more determinant than ideology

              Comment


              • #7
                Originally posted by Morgan Kane
                I am not sure we are in the right topic but :

                ... ....
                Quite right. This all belongs on the Arab Lady Psychologist Thread. And I'm not saying that Wafa Sultan, the psychologist lady might not have a point, but to use her eloquent outburst on Al Jazeera to justify "why supporters of the war are correct", doesn't make much sense to me. Perhaps, The Adlerian should read and view a bit more of Al Jazeera. Net's output, to get a more balanced overview, from the Arab viewpoint, of whatever The Adlerian means by "the war" which is devastating the region and killing, or maiming, tens of thousands of innocent men, women and children, at the moment.

                Some edited highlights from Wafa Sultan's speech, on Hirsi Ali's web blog site:
                http://ayaanhirsiali.web-log.nl/ayaa...ch_this_w.html

                As others have inquired, what exactly is "the war" to which The Adlerian is referring?

                If the Adlerian is suggesting that the present bloody conflagration being fought in several countries around the Midddle East can be justified as a clash of ideologies and cultures, as some sort of new Crusades, then I have to say, using the "Hulk not like! Hulk smash!" model of foreign diplomacy in the region, has been shown historically to be doomed to failure and actually creates more problems than it solves.

                What I'd really like to know is, what does Wafa Sultan think now, after the recent events in Lebanon and Gaza?
                Last edited by Pietro_Mercurios; 08-18-2006, 01:04 AM.

                Comment


                • #8
                  OK,

                  Chrisitianism, since WWII, has been neutralized by secularism. It is far from inocuous. Fundamentalist christian preach hate and murder, for instance against doctor aborting women.

                  To fight religious fanticism, the good reference is secularism, not another religion .......

                  To preach secularism is a good thing, but the woman preaches war, even in the name of democracy and rights of humankind.

                  To make war, she needs allies and Bush as a non fundamentalis secular democrat, i don' t believe .....

                  Comment


                  • #9
                    Originally posted by TheAdlerian
                    I don't think that you're answering very bravely.
                    What are you avoiding?
                    Since I suspect Pietro won't dignify that question with a response...

                    From what I can tell, he is only avoiding a stupid and baiting question with an obvious answer. Particularly obvious, I might add, given the measured and thoughtful contributions I have always seen him make.

                    Comment


                    • #10
                      Originally posted by TheAdlerian
                      Fundamentalist christian:

                      These people do not have any kind of state or real power.
                      Are you kidding? Bush may pander to them as a smokescreen for his support of corporations, but they have forced both Bush and the Republican Congress to deliver on some of their pet issues. Look at who the newest Supreme Court Justices are, and what their litmus tests were.

                      Originally posted by TheAdlerian
                      What they have is rhetoric and they endorse lots of basic moral/ethical ideas that many people in, for instance, the US tend to agree with. Bush and his class are capitalists with a pragmatic view. He is not a Christian, because if he was, then he would not be rich, and he would not be making war.
                      I don't disagree with your sentiment, but I certainly disagree with your theology. Good Calvinists are supposed to make lots of money (or war) if that is how they see their calling from God.

                      Originally posted by TheAdlerian
                      Bush and most capitalistis in the west want to maintain their "kingdom" and it's potential to continue to exist and bring in money. They want a stable world in which to conduct business. So, on one hand, they are sinister in that their desire for peace, and so forth, is motivated by a type of greed. On the other, they are a lesser and more sensible evil as compared to a culture that opperates, at best, on a psychotic supernatural fantasy, and at worst uses that fantasy to create ignorant slaves for a cynical elite.
                      I cannot disagree with this.

                      Originally posted by TheAdlerian
                      What's really going on in the world is, as mentioned in the video, a clash of civilizations. As long as transport and technology maintain themselves the world will have these problems, because people with clashing ideas about life will be constantly encountering each other. If you look at recorded history, then it's easy to see that this is true.
                      Trade and cultural exchange is also an outcome of this. Not just war.

                      Originally posted by TheAdlerian
                      Additionally, it's pretty much a fact that "culture" is a construct of the mind and nothing else. Chinese people raised in America are American far more than they are Chinese, so that is the "experiment" that invalidates any steadfast view of culture.

                      So, if there exists a negative culture (which is relative) then how does one get rid of it? Since "culture" rests in the mind, then one must eliminate the minds of the people in the culture. Simply, this is done via killing them, or using propaganda to change their minds.
                      I'm not sure how you see this as "factual," as this is just wrong, even by Jungian standards. (Either that or every cultural anthropologist and cultural sociologists I've ever known and read is wrong.) Culture certainly exists in the mind, but it is a lived experience, with tangible artifacts that outlive any one person. You aren't going to eliminate language, for instance, simply by killing people, any more than you can kill engineering or philosophy.

                      Originally posted by TheAdlerian
                      War is very effective in changing and killing minds and is repeatedly turned to by humans as an effective means of controling human behavior, thus far there is no alternative that has ever worked.
                      So all of that diplomacy in history has been ineffective? In just the short history of America, I think you'll find that Jefferson, Franklin, Lincoln, Roosevelt, Carter, and Reagan (just to name a few) would disagree with you.

                      Originally posted by TheAdlerian
                      If you look at dueling in European culture you'll find that it was thought that the winner was favored by god, and was correct in his views because of the win. Western and mid-eastern humans continue to express these beliefs and so war is an excellent method of killing and changing minds.

                      It's sad but true.
                      I'm not sure how this is germaine. Dueling and war are certainly two different things.

                      Comment


                      • #11
                        I repeat, the fight is not beetwen civilisations but beetwen values and the situation is much more complex than islam against chrisitandom.....

                        If you reduce the fight to a fight beetwen civilisations, you make a big strategic mistake and religion will win !

                        I hope for the victory of secularism, tolerance, personnal rights and freedom ...... and neither Bush and fiundamentalis chrisitians, neither islamists ( i don' t say muslims ) are my allies. Both are my ennemies.

                        Comment


                        • #12
                          I think that Wafa Sultan's dichotomy was a mean to stress her point. I'm sure she's aware nothing is black and white. There are extremists on both sides. However, in our modern times, there are indeed more Muslims willing to got to such extremes than Christians or Jews, and this is something that has to be studied and dealt with. While some label Bush as an extremists, he's still incomparable to, let's say, Ahmandinejad.

                          Comment


                          • #13
                            Originally posted by TheAdlerian
                            If you look at dueling in European culture you'll find that it was thought that the winner was favored by god, and was correct in his views because of the win.
                            At the risk of inflaming this debate anymore than it already is, I'll just like to say:

                            That was bullshit then and it's still bullshit now.

                            (By which I mean the belief is wrong, not that people didn't believe it once upon a time.)
                            _"For an eternity Allard was alone in an icy limbo where all the colours were bright and sharp and comfortless.
                            _For another eternity Allard swam through seas without end, all green and cool and deep, where distorted creatures drifted, sometimes attacking him.
                            _And then, at last, he had reached the real world – the world he had created, where he was God and could create or destroy whatever he wished.
                            _He was supremely powerful. He told planets to destroy themselves, and they did. He created suns. Beautiful women flocked to be his. Of all men, he was the mightiest. Of all gods, he was the greatest."

                            Comment


                            • #14
                              Here's some background on the woman. That video is an impressive document of human courage whether or not you agree with her views. She knows the risk she is taking: "she was shocked into secularism by the 1979 atrocities committed by the Muslim Brotherhood against innocent Syrian people, including the machine-gun assassination of her professor in her classroom in front of her eyes at the University of Aleppo where she was a medical student."

                              It's quite clear which "war" she is referring to: it's the war declared by Islamists on the West. Some of us may be in doubt as to whether this has actually been declared, but they are not. Unlike the Adlerian, I do believe a peaceful version of Islam is possible (as indeed are peaceful versions of Christianity, Judaism and any other religion you care to name - holy books, however bloodthirsty, can always be interpreted as allegories for the spiritual life), but its voice is sadly muted at present.
                              Last edited by Mikey_C; 08-18-2006, 03:11 PM.
                              \"...an ape reft of his tail, and grown rusty at climbing, who yet feels himself to be a symbol and the frail representative of Omnipotence in a place that is not home.\" James Branch Cabell

                              Comment


                              • #15
                                The war is not against the west per se but against democratic values and rights of humankind !

                                The U.S. administration was not adverse to help the islamists when theses were fighting the soviets .......

                                The religious leaders agree on many terms relating to the interdiction to change religion except to convert to their religion, statute of women and so .....

                                I agree, there is a war but do not make mistakes about the enemy.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X