 |
| Register | Login | |||||
 |
Main
| Memberlist
| Active users
| ACS
| Commons
| Calendar
| Online users Ranks | FAQ | Color Chart | Photo album | IRC Chat |
|
| | ||
|
| Register | Login | |||||
|
Main
| Memberlist
| Active users
| ACS
| Commons
| Calendar
| Online users Ranks | FAQ | Color Chart | Photo album | IRC Chat |
|
| | ||
| Acmlm's Board - I2 Archive - - Posts by Arwon |
| Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 |
| User | Post | ||
Arwon Zora Level: 35  Posts: 366/506 EXP: 278115 For next: 1821 Since: 03-15-04 From: Terra Australis Incognita Since last post: 5 hours Last activity: 10 min. |
| ||
| People in America put their constitution on too high a pedistal. | |||
|
Arwon Zora Level: 35 Posts: 367/506 EXP: 278115 For next: 1821 Since: 03-15-04 From: Terra Australis Incognita Since last post: 5 hours Last activity: 10 min. |
| ||
| The militarisation of space is gonna be awesome. | |||
|
Arwon Zora Level: 35 Posts: 368/506 EXP: 278115 For next: 1821 Since: 03-15-04 From: Terra Australis Incognita Since last post: 5 hours Last activity: 10 min. |
| ||
| And here I thought it was gonna be a topic about the Beck album Sea Change. Um, I got about 8. |
|||
|
Arwon Zora Level: 35 Posts: 369/506 EXP: 278115 For next: 1821 Since: 03-15-04 From: Terra Australis Incognita Since last post: 5 hours Last activity: 10 min. |
| ||
| But like I said earlier, despite the uberreligious population the paradox is that the US is really really secular. Hence the conflict. I mean, Australia's a far less religious place than the US (Hillsong nonwithstanding...), as is the UK, but in both countries public schools often have scripture or religion classes and while everyone thinks they're stupid, no-one really cares. Hell, our head of state the Queen is actually the figurehead of a religion. Separation of church and state in both countries basically consists of putting the church in funny hats so no-one takes it seriously. |
|||
|
Arwon Zora Level: 35 Posts: 370/506 EXP: 278115 For next: 1821 Since: 03-15-04 From: Terra Australis Incognita Since last post: 5 hours Last activity: 10 min. |
| ||
| K, terrorist bombings and stuff. The questions that matter are Why Does This Happen? and What Can Be Done To Stop It?. As to the first question, "They hate us because we're Wonderful" and "they hate us because we Screw Them" seem to be the most popular response from various quarters. But of course these are both idiocy. As to the second, it's obvious and timeless, the response was predestined from the moment those towers fell. The default human response is to lash out with a flailing and righteous madness, to bash, crush and destroy that which scares and offends, and the default politician response is to declare War on something - anything. Decisive Action! Show strength and resolve! Who cares about the details, it'll get votes! Put them together and we have the "war on terrorism", latest sequel to the seemingly inevitable trend of our society reacting to scary things by trying to stomp them into oblivion without thinking things through. Whether it's homeless people, drugs, communism or now islamic terrorists, anything that scares and confuses the so called Decent People must be stomped and destroyed. Of course, unlike some of these other phantom threats terrorism is actually a real deadly threat, even if more people die in car accidents the psychological impacts are enormous - hence the kneejerk STOMP THINGS reaction. The scariest bit, the thing no-one seems to talk about, is that we don't know what we're doing. No-one knows how to fight terrorism as it exists in the dark days of 2005, and no-one will point out this scary reality, which is that maybe, just maybe, there IS no way to fight it, nothing proactive that WE can do to stomp this violent mutant idea that exists "out there" amongst some of the browner peoples of the earth. We will be attacked again, and we can't stop it. The thing about this "Terrorism" we've declared war on, is that it's so vague and ill-defined even by the perpetrators. It's basically a warped idea out there, that everyone should attack wherever and however they can, under the common banner of some struggle that no-one can actually explain or define. Is it God or geopolitics or anger or jealousy or injustice or power or what? It's nothing - it's an idea but it's so vague as to be all-purpose - and it gained militancy and experience at the periphery of the Cold War (it's a matter of priorities!). It's angry kids, frustrated people who want to believe in something, anything (we have those here, too, attached to every cause imaginable), it's the just plain wierd and antisocial. Hell, the kids that bombed London were cricket-lovers and UK-born. You really can't fight that unless you get so equally broad and all-purpose as to attack all the Muslims. And probably others too - that sort of persecution and genocide would, these days, no doubt breed new radicals and "sympathisers"... making the expansion of targets inevitable. And that'd be kinda defeating the purpose of being the "good guys" eh? You can't attack "the infrastructure" of a bunch of people who really share nothing but a vague idea and shared enemies. The various warlords in Afghanistan, the dudes who flew into the Towers armed with box cutters, the young Pakistani-English cricketers in London... all they truly have in common is this Idea, this vague blueprint. It helps to have some historical perspective. It's not the first crazy violent scary idea to have lurked at the edges of Western Civilisation and in its frustrated nooks and crannies. 100 years ago angry anarchists assassinated aristocrats and set off bombs, 30 or 40 years ago Marxist students gripped Europe with fear. These Ideas happen. All it takes is one angry guy with a bomb recipe, a few guys with knives, and you have another blow struck in the name of The Idea. The odds are in their favour, their requirements for success infinitely lower. This frustrates Us, we're used to being able to Fight Things and smash them, this is how our movies and our history has trained us to think - there's a problem? We can fix it with violence or money or both! We're rich and powerful and have lots of war machines - aren't they supposed to fix everything? What the fuck else do our taxes PAY for? Hell, at least with Communism there was countries to hate, and things were neatly delineated into Us and Them, with both sides using basically the same terms of conflict, but with things like Drugs and Terrorism... there's nothing to fight and bomb and stomp, and declaring War on stuff kinda related to it merely "Gives The Issue Air" the same way that banning racism breeds new strains of ultra-resistant super-racism with a new sense of persecution and righteousness. Seems justified but doens't work and actually makes things worse, harder to draw back from. React against something and you radicalise and marginalise it, which makes people dangerous and Wierd. This is what "the left" and certain Libertarians are trying to mean when they say that playing War on Terrorism whack-a-mole is counterproductive... but they are unable to take the next step and say that there's actually nothing proactive that we CAN do. Instead mostly they(we) resort to tired and facile fantasy ideas about poverty and injustice and imperialism. Remember the other major answer as to WHY... "they hate us because we Screw Them" which is every bit as dumb as "they hate us because we're Wonderful." Yeah, we do screw the rest of the world and are, basically, willing to kill anyone who makes us uncomfortable or stops us from getting [oil/coffee/fruit/sugar/whatever the fuck else we have killed for in the past]... but that's gone on for a long time and although our general bastardry and selfishness and callousness towards the "Third World" doesn't help is probably not the core reason these lunatics lash out like this. It just doesn't fit right. If it was the case, massive armies of South Americans would have butchered people all over the US and Africans would have done likewise in Europe. Nope, it seems pretty clear now that this Idea is going to have to peter out at its own rate like other ideas before it (like the anarchist assassins and Marxist students and so forth I mentioned above) - let it collapse under the weight of its own mutant wierdness - and the best we can do is protect ourselves in the meantime, knowing that while all this violence and fear stuff is depressing, our roads and our indifference will kill more people than These People ever could. But no-one wants to admit this, our essential inability to STOMP the scary things... becuase it is unpallatable, political suicide, in a world where We Are Wonderful and can fight everything with money or violence. Instead, we get clampdowns on everything vaguely menacing, lots of shiny shows of uniformed and disciplined strength and desperate displays of patriotism to satisfy the terrified yobs, and we get meaningless posturing from politicians going through the motions, claiming to have answers and plans that they can't have, because they don't exist. |
|||
|
Arwon Zora Level: 35 Posts: 371/506 EXP: 278115 For next: 1821 Since: 03-15-04 From: Terra Australis Incognita Since last post: 5 hours Last activity: 10 min. |
| ||
| Open letter to Love: Stop hurting now. Thanks -Sean |
|||
|
Arwon Zora Level: 35 Posts: 372/506 EXP: 278115 For next: 1821 Since: 03-15-04 From: Terra Australis Incognita Since last post: 5 hours Last activity: 10 min. |
| ||
Originally posted by CheesePie "These guys"? You mean random British born Pakistani kids? Seeing the bombers in all different countries as a coherent group seems to miss the point to me. The only thing binding them together is a vague idea that says "attack and fight the enemy (whatever he is) in any way you can", not a plan of operations. |
|||
|
Arwon Zora Level: 35 Posts: 373/506 EXP: 278115 For next: 1821 Since: 03-15-04 From: Terra Australis Incognita Since last post: 5 hours Last activity: 10 min. |
| ||
| Yeah, I noticed that most Americans spell it the wrong way and can't figure out how to pronounce it when its spelled the correct way. There *is* a correct way to spell it. It's a friggin' Irish name, it should be spelled the Irish way. That said, most Aussies know how to pronounce it, I think the correct Irish spelling is more common here than the bastardised Anglicised versions. You could also utilise the truly Gaelic spelling and place an accent over the A, spell your name Se |
|||
|
Arwon Zora Level: 35 Posts: 374/506 EXP: 278115 For next: 1821 Since: 03-15-04 From: Terra Australis Incognita Since last post: 5 hours Last activity: 10 min. |
| ||
| SomerZ, I think you're misusing the word "indifferences" incorrectly. The word you want is inequalities or inequities. "Indifference" means "not caring" or "apathy". Just a little random English advice, yell at me if it isnt appreciated. edit:: Ziff apologizes for the Aussie's lack of knowledge of the capital Z (edited by Ziff on 07-24-05 02:22 PM) |
|||
|
Arwon Zora Level: 35 Posts: 375/506 EXP: 278115 For next: 1821 Since: 03-15-04 From: Terra Australis Incognita Since last post: 5 hours Last activity: 10 min. |
| ||
| Very true... the nuances and subtleties of a language make it pretty hard to communicate complicated ideaas even if you're fluent but not native. I'm actually studying linguistics and attempting to learn a second language, and I've also adjudicated some debates involving universities from Asian countries for whom English is a second language... So it's something that interests me greatly. Also, FWIW, I just realised I said "misusing incorrectly" in that last post. DOUBLE NEGATIVES! Suppose it's inevitable, correct someone else's post, butcher your own... |
|||
|
Arwon Zora Level: 35 Posts: 376/506 EXP: 278115 For next: 1821 Since: 03-15-04 From: Terra Australis Incognita Since last post: 5 hours Last activity: 10 min. |
| ||
| I'm a checkout chick at a local supermarket. I want to quit because I hate the supervisors, they're slow and incompetent (compared to the last store i worked at) and mess up my roster a lot. Also because it's beginning to fuck up my back and I'm getting Government student payments anyway so I could live without the extra income. But AUS$18.40/hr plus a variety of extra penalty rates (something like $32/hr on Sunday nights) is too good to let go really. It's way better than I'd get at most other service industry McJobs. So in my rut I shall stay for the time being. |
|||
|
Arwon Zora Level: 35 Posts: 377/506 EXP: 278115 For next: 1821 Since: 03-15-04 From: Terra Australis Incognita Since last post: 5 hours Last activity: 10 min. |
| ||
| A good location and an industrial quantity of booze. A few slabs of beer and a couple of bottles of spirits, most likely cheap Vodka, along with some mixers like coca cola and such. Provide that, I wouldnt bother with food... maybe a bit of a BBQ early on. (edited by Arwon on 07-26-05 08:06 AM) |
|||
|
Arwon Zora Level: 35 Posts: 378/506 EXP: 278115 For next: 1821 Since: 03-15-04 From: Terra Australis Incognita Since last post: 5 hours Last activity: 10 min. |
| ||
| From the Sydney Morning Herald: Catholics are among the least homophobic people in Australia, despite the church's leaders railing against gay rights, a new study has found. The Australia Institute study, Mapping Homophobia in Australia, released today, shows two-thirds of Baptists and evangelical Christians believe homosexuality to be immoral. But Catholics, Anglicans and Uniting church members are the most tolerant, with only a third saying homosexuality is immoral. Report co-author Dr Clive Hamilton said Catholic church views on homosexuality were among the highest profile in the country, with prominent leaders such as Cardinal George Pell active in debates over gay marriage and resisting calls to allow gay priests. "However, it turns out that, among those who declare a religious affiliation, Catholics are the most tolerant in Australia," Dr Williams said. "These counter-intuitive findings suggest that the Catholic Church has less doctrinal authority over its congregation than some other Christian and non-Christian churches." (and it continues to say other fairly obvious stuff... atheists and young adults are the least anti-gay, teenage boys and old people are more anti-gay, and irrelevantly for most of you but unsurprisingly to me, suburban Queenslanders and western Tasmanians are the most anti-gay geographical groups) This pretty much proves my theory about Catholics being pretty tolerant and moderate and secular these days. I actually think the all-encompassing unity and sheer irrationality of the Catholic Church, coupled with the fatalism about original sin and so forth (we're all sinners, so we should do our best but realise no-one is perfect and there's no point being judgemental), tend to make Catholics far less prone to indoctrination than people think. They mostly listen to what the Pope and Bishops say, maybe agree it's a nice idea, then turn around and ignore it anyway and go back to doing whatever they were to begin with. It's a nice set-up. After all, it ain't Catholics blowing up abortion clinics, running http://www.godhatesfags.com and so forth. The Catholic Church's elected-monarchy power structure is archaic, backwards and, let's face it, crazy, but because no-one really listens too closely, it lends a fairly benign unifying moral force compared to most Protestants who, faced with doctrinal conflicts and uncomfortable moral questions, split into smaller groups and yell a lot. (edited by Arwon on 07-26-05 08:24 AM) (edited by Arwon on 07-27-05 07:35 AM) (edited by alte Hex on 07-27-05 07:36 AM) (edited by alte Hex on 07-27-05 07:41 AM) (edited by Arwon on 07-27-05 08:03 AM) |
|||
|
Arwon Zora Level: 35 Posts: 379/506 EXP: 278115 For next: 1821 Since: 03-15-04 From: Terra Australis Incognita Since last post: 5 hours Last activity: 10 min. |
| ||
| Wiki Article on Australia's Same Sex Marriage situation and one on Civil Unions Marriage was recently redefined as between a man and a woman by the Federal Government, a Liberal/National coalition (Tories and classical liberals and a rural party, tending mostly towards the Tory faction). The opposition, nominally centreleft Labor Party (but whose often hawkish and socially conservative Right Faction dominates federally and probably constitutes the Centre of Aussie politics) supported this move, much to the despairing chagrin of progressive forces in this country who are in a minority *just small enough* to render us incredibly ineffectual right now in our particular electoral system. That said, there's plenty of Common Law workarounds used by the States, Tasmania has civil unions, approximating the Vermont situation... and de facto relationship recognition extends to gays in four of the six states and both internal territories. Given that Tassie has civil unions this leaves only South Australia offering no recognition... and there the legislation is on the cards too. Moreover, Tasmania and the Australian Capital Territory (our equivalent to the District of Columbia) may well soon recognise same sex marriages, but that'll possibly be overturned to the extent that it contradicts federal law. It'll be interesting if it happens... the High Court of Australia virtually always backs the federal government, we're far more centralist than either Canada or the US. Bear in mind Labor controls every state and territory government, but has a minority government in South Australia. They're not necessarily *for* gay marriage, that's never been federal Labor policy, but at the state level in many places they've shown a willingness to try to achieve equality and an end to discrimination in practical terms. Much like in the UK, our common law system lets us grant virtual equality - civil unions or in the UK civil partnerships which will in popular parlance be called "marriage" anyway (no-one will ask "will you civilly unionise with me?") and grant baically the same rights... without the messiness of a massive constituional shit-fight and Supreme Court angst, like America usually has. At a cultural level, in any major city gays are quite accepted. Sydney's biggest party of the year aside from New Years is the Gay and Lesbian Mardis Gras... and yeah, there's been a substantial cultural shift to the point where gays are basically accepted here outside of fairly religious or bigoted circles (let's not forget that opposition to gays isn't just religious, but also can come from really blokey working-class guys who "don't like poofs". Oh, and from non-anglo-celts of less progressive backgrounds, Chinese and the like). Hell, even in my rural hometown, my best friend came out at high school with little problem, and took his boyfriend to the formal (prom-type-event) with confidence. Interestingly enough he's the only friend I have who's managed, and still has, a successful and stable long term relationship. Also: I, for the record, am nominally Catholic, I was baptised and the Census thinks I am Catholic. I am atheist but feel certain cultural affinties (my father's family were Catholic raised in the working class docks area of Port Adelaide) towards the Church, and usually defend it from criticism because Catholics ain't so bad. Also: Please note the correct spelling of Australia, everyone. (edited by Arwon on 07-27-05 08:00 AM) (edited by Arwon on 07-27-05 08:01 AM) (edited by Arwon on 07-27-05 08:02 AM) (edited by Arwon on 07-27-05 08:08 AM) |
|||
|
Arwon Zora Level: 35 Posts: 380/506 EXP: 278115 For next: 1821 Since: 03-15-04 From: Terra Australis Incognita Since last post: 5 hours Last activity: 10 min. |
| ||
| What if it's the remains of a computer that collided with God? | |||
|
Arwon Zora Level: 35 Posts: 381/506 EXP: 278115 For next: 1821 Since: 03-15-04 From: Terra Australis Incognita Since last post: 5 hours Last activity: 10 min. |
| ||
| Haha, wasn't the Satanic Verses that book by Salman Rushdie? I can only assume what'd happen is that someone'd issue a fatwa on the courthouse. |
|||
|
Arwon Zora Level: 35 Posts: 382/506 EXP: 278115 For next: 1821 Since: 03-15-04 From: Terra Australis Incognita Since last post: 5 hours Last activity: 10 min. |
| ||
| The private sector is terrible at high risk upfront investments with only a long-term payoff (eg transport and utilities infrastructure). They're pretty decent at taking over these sorts of ventures later on... well, they can be, but as for building them... no. | |||
|
Arwon Zora Level: 35 Posts: 383/506 EXP: 278115 For next: 1821 Since: 03-15-04 From: Terra Australis Incognita Since last post: 5 hours Last activity: 10 min. |
| ||
| Better that others feel the pain, surely. Sure, I'm a bit of a romantic, but I'm also a somewhat jilted cynic. Love's important, it can be great, but it FUCKING HURTS, too. (edited by Arwon on 07-27-05 08:24 AM) |
|||
|
Arwon Zora Level: 35 Posts: 384/506 EXP: 278115 For next: 1821 Since: 03-15-04 From: Terra Australis Incognita Since last post: 5 hours Last activity: 10 min. |
| ||
Originally posted by beneficiiOriginally posted by Arwon The infrastructure's already been laid down... NASA and the USSR's equivalent have been researching and developing for 30 years. Branson isn't starting from zero. And aviation advances? Well, in the early days, mostly during the World Wars with heavy influence from government money! |
|||
|
Arwon Zora Level: 35 Posts: 385/506 EXP: 278115 For next: 1821 Since: 03-15-04 From: Terra Australis Incognita Since last post: 5 hours Last activity: 10 min. |
| ||
Originally posted by Danielle I wanna live on your planet. |
| Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 |
| Acmlm's Board - I2 Archive - - Posts by Arwon |
