|
Post by bigjohnritchie on May 29, 2015 8:01:39 GMT
Edge I don't really understand what you mean in your last post. It seems to be similar to what I am saying. For me this has been about the fact that many/most of us have principles, compromise them when it is the best course of action (which is a principle in itself), do retain a line over which they cannot cross (Nello and Port Vale), recognise this and are quite content with it in the real world. I guess its another "agree to disagree" , until next time we clash. Chomsky's view on freedom of expression is quite good though, isn't it?
|
|
|
Post by bathstoke on May 29, 2015 8:07:16 GMT
He'd tell them they need to give it up and give it to the poor wouldn't he. But they don't, perhaps too difficult of a principle to live up to? 23 Then said Jesus unto his disciples, Verily I say unto you, That a rich man shall hardly enter into the kingdom of heaven. 24 And again I say unto you, It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle, than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of God. 25 When his disciples heard it, they were exceedingly amazed, saying, Who then can be saved? 26 But Jesus beheld them, and said unto them, With men this is impossible; but with God all things are possible. People have written books on this parable & it looks like we're doing our best to on here Verses 25 & 26 apply
|
|
|
Post by edgepotter on May 29, 2015 9:38:53 GMT
So if my understanding is correct the point you're driving at is that expecting someone to give up their wealth is an unrealistic expectation, Jesus saying 'anything is possible with God' is effectively saying that God understands that it's unrealistic for mankind to give up their wealth so you don't have to give it up in order to get into heaven.
|
|
|
Post by bigjohnritchie on May 29, 2015 10:01:31 GMT
Not really. I am using Christianity as an example because you said something about "not undestanding faith" about 2135 posts ago. I am talking about people keeping to principles, which you refered to around 3191 (and this is just meant to be light hearted!)posts ago infringement , I think, in saying something like 'everyone at all times should stick to their principles'. Having been in many a situation where I've needed a bit of courage and compromise I don't think that it is always the best policy to 'stick to your principles (if they don't allow for compromise or at least freedom to express). What I am saying could equally apply to socialists, and perversely capitalists who are philanthropists (dont like the word , it sounds condescending ).Tony Benn compromised in his support of New Labour, being a lesser evil than the Tories. Chomssky seems to agree to an extent. It seems so obvious to me that it isn't really worth arguing about any more , so I will take the ' agree to disagree ' option. As Patrick said in an earlier post ,great ideals, often impractical.
Not being a Christian either, I don't particularly want to pursue the argument, but perhaps Jesus would have to address global equality and INDIVIDUAL as well as corporate wealth if he made a quick visit around his Universe.
|
|
|
Post by wizzardofdribble on May 29, 2015 10:22:19 GMT
I don't remember Tony Benn ever supporting New Labour. He was one of it's fiercest crics. I was at the Anti-War Demo in London along with a couple of million other people & heard Tony Benn destroy New Labour/ Blair in a speech ridiculing the notion of WMD & warning of the long term implications of bombing Iraq.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on May 29, 2015 10:33:19 GMT
Edge Do you think that Chomsky is correct in the clip below from the Guardian? ‘Gay cake’ ruling sets dangerous precedent Gareth Lee, a gay rights activist, outside court in Northern Ireland as a judge ruled that a Christian-run bakery discriminated against him by refusing to make a cake with a slogan supporting same-sex marriage Thursday 21 May 2015 19.13 BST Last modified on Friday 22 May 2015 00.00 BST In the light of the Belfast ruling (Christian bakers lose ‘gay cake’ court case, 20 May), ask which of the following you would also be in favour of: 1) A gay bakery being penalised in law for refusing to ice Old Testament or Qur’an verses against homosexuality on to a cake intended for a conservative Christian/Jewish/Muslim event; 2) A Jewish bakery being penalised in law for refusing to ice antisemitic imprecations on to a cake for a neonazi/radical traditionalist Catholic/Islamist event; 3) A Palestinian bakery being penalised in law for refusing to ice a celebration of the anniversary of the state of Israel on to a cake for a Zionist organisation. Chomsky noted that “if we don’t believe in freedom of expression for people we despise, we don’t believe in it at all” – but this applies no less to freedoms of belief and conscience. The gay couple in question were always free to express their beliefs: they could have sought out a baker sympathetic to their views to ice their cake, or iced it themselves. Instead, they used the law to force a person to express views he finds abhorrent. This issue has nothing to do with “equality” and everything to do with freedom of belief, conscience and expression – it being an implacable attack on these latter. It sets a dreadful precedent. The application of discrimination law to settle these questions of conflicts of belief is taking us away from a free society and towards one where a secular priesthood of judges, bureaucrats and activists regulate every aspect of our lives. Mate, stop cutting and pasting please. Does me yed in. Pack it in. Its a meessagesboard ffs ie "You're a knob" "knob?" "yes, knob!" "you're a f*****g c**t!" etc...
|
|
|
Post by edgepotter on May 29, 2015 10:33:30 GMT
Not really. I am using Christianity as an example because you said something about "not undestanding faith" about 2135 posts ago. I am talking about people keeping to principles, which you refered to around 3191 (and this is just meant to be light hearted!)posts ago infringement , I think, in saying something like everyone at all times should stick to their principles, implying at all times . Having been in many a situation where I've needed a bit of courage and compromise I don't think that it is always the best policy to 'stick to your principles (if they don't allow for compromise or at least freedom to express). What I am saying could equally apply to socialists, and perversely capitalists who are philanthropists (dont like the word , it sounds condescending ).Tony Benn compromised in his support of New Labour, being a lesser evil than the Tories. Chomssky seems to agree to an extent. It seems so obvious to me that it isn't really worth arguing about any more , so I will take the ' agree to disagree ' option. As Patrick said in an earlier post ,great ideals, often impractical. Not being a Christian either, I don't particularly want to pursue the argument, but perhaps Jesus would have to address global equality and INDIVIDUAL as well as corporate wealth if he made a quick visit around his Universe. I understand what you're saying and I think the points you're making are very valid. I know I criticise the corporate wealth a lot but I'm just as much against individual wealth/greed which is something I hope I've highlighted by referencing Richard Branson and the Walton family in previous posts. I'm aware that I've got ideals that are never going to completely obtainable but I don't think that should stop us from trying to change things for the better. An argument Chomsky makes and one I fully agree with is that the capitalist system is geared up to make money and create wealth, it doesn't really concern itself with the welfare of the workers and most of the good things that have come about as a result of capitalism are more likely to be by coincedence rather than by design or the intention. There are plenty of things we can tweak or change to make things better and I'd like to give you just two examples. I've seen effective co-operative businesses and I'd like to see more of them. bussiness lobyists - I don't understand why we allow such practices and I think we should get rid.
|
|
|
Post by bigjohnritchie on May 29, 2015 10:42:35 GMT
Not really. I am using Christianity as an example because you said something about "not undestanding faith" about 2135 posts ago. I am talking about people keeping to principles, which you refered to around 3191 (and this is just meant to be light hearted!)posts ago infringement , I think, in saying something like everyone at all times should stick to their principles, implying at all times . Having been in many a situation where I've needed a bit of courage and compromise I don't think that it is always the best policy to 'stick to your principles (if they don't allow for compromise or at least freedom to express). What I am saying could equally apply to socialists, and perversely capitalists who are philanthropists (dont like the word , it sounds condescending ).Tony Benn compromised in his support of New Labour, being a lesser evil than the Tories. Chomssky seems to agree to an extent. It seems so obvious to me that it isn't really worth arguing about any more , so I will take the ' agree to disagree ' option. As Patrick said in an earlier post ,great ideals, often impractical. Not being a Christian either, I don't particularly want to pursue the argument, but perhaps Jesus would have to address global equality and INDIVIDUAL as well as corporate wealth if he made a quick visit around his Universe. I understand what you're saying and I think the points you're making are very valid. I know I criticise the corporate wealth a lot but I'm just as much against individual wealth/greed which is something I hope I've highlighted by referencing Richard Branson and the Walton family in previous posts. I'm aware that I've got ideals that are never going to completely obtainable but I don't think that should stop us from trying to change things for the better. An argument Chomsky makes and one I fully agree with is that the capitalist system is geared up to make money and create wealth, it doesn't really concern itself with the welfare of the workers and most of the good things that have come about as a result of capitalism are more likely to be by coincedence rather than by design or the intention. There are plenty of things we can tweak or change to make things better and I'd like to give you just two examples. I've seen effective co-operative businesses and I'd like to see more of them. bussiness lobyists - I don't understand why we allow such practices and I think we should get rid. Okay Edge, I think that we can agree on most of that, have a good day
|
|
|
Post by bigjohnritchie on May 29, 2015 10:47:27 GMT
Edge Do you think that Chomsky is correct in the clip below from the Guardian? ‘Gay cake’ ruling sets dangerous precedent Gareth Lee, a gay rights activist, outside court in Northern Ireland as a judge ruled that a Christian-run bakery discriminated against him by refusing to make a cake with a slogan supporting same-sex marriage Thursday 21 May 2015 19.13 BST Last modified on Friday 22 May 2015 00.00 BST In the light of the Belfast ruling (Christian bakers lose ‘gay cake’ court case, 20 May), ask which of the following you would also be in favour of: 1) A gay bakery being penalised in law for refusing to ice Old Testament or Qur’an verses against homosexuality on to a cake intended for a conservative Christian/Jewish/Muslim event; 2) A Jewish bakery being penalised in law for refusing to ice antisemitic imprecations on to a cake for a neonazi/radical traditionalist Catholic/Islamist event; 3) A Palestinian bakery being penalised in law for refusing to ice a celebration of the anniversary of the state of Israel on to a cake for a Zionist organisation. Chomsky noted that “if we don’t believe in freedom of expression for people we despise, we don’t believe in it at all” – but this applies no less to freedoms of belief and conscience. The gay couple in question were always free to express their beliefs: they could have sought out a baker sympathetic to their views to ice their cake, or iced it themselves. Instead, they used the law to force a person to express views he finds abhorrent. This issue has nothing to do with “equality” and everything to do with freedom of belief, conscience and expression – it being an implacable attack on these latter. It sets a dreadful precedent. The application of discrimination law to settle these questions of conflicts of belief is taking us away from a free society and towards one where a secular priesthood of judges, bureaucrats and activists regulate every aspect of our lives. Mate, stop cutting and pasting please. Does me yed in. Pack it in. Its a meessagesboard ffs ie "You're a knob" "knob?" "yes, knob!" "you're a f*****g c**t!" etc... Etruria Sorry about that! I know what you mean.I do tend to do it alot. I just can't help it! Just give my posts a wide berth, no one will mind
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on May 29, 2015 10:52:19 GMT
Mate, stop cutting and pasting please. Does me yed in. Pack it in. Its a meessagesboard ffs ie "You're a knob" "knob?" "yes, knob!" "you're a f*****g c**t!" etc... Etruria Sorry about that! I know what you mean.I do tend to do it alot. I just can't help it! Just give my posts a wide berth, no one will mind Dems da rules Big John. Post a link, don't post the content. I still love you though.
|
|
|
Post by edgepotter on May 29, 2015 11:03:56 GMT
I understand what you're saying and I think the points you're making are very valid. I know I criticise the corporate wealth a lot but I'm just as much against individual wealth/greed which is something I hope I've highlighted by referencing Richard Branson and the Walton family in previous posts. I'm aware that I've got ideals that are never going to completely obtainable but I don't think that should stop us from trying to change things for the better. An argument Chomsky makes and one I fully agree with is that the capitalist system is geared up to make money and create wealth, it doesn't really concern itself with the welfare of the workers and most of the good things that have come about as a result of capitalism are more likely to be by coincedence rather than by design or the intention. There are plenty of things we can tweak or change to make things better and I'd like to give you just two examples. I've seen effective co-operative businesses and I'd like to see more of them. bussiness lobyists - I don't understand why we allow such practices and I think we should get rid. Okay Edge, I think that we can agree on most of that, have a good day Thanks bigjohn, I've enjoyed this discussion and you've provided me with a few things to think about. Enjoy your day too good sir
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on May 29, 2015 12:05:03 GMT
What I'm saying is you can certainly give examples of where socialism and communism hasn't worked, but I'd argue it's because it either wasn't carried out correctly or there were other factors like influence from the US. Chomsky makes a very compelling case and I'd love to see you debate him on this topic. I get you - but here's the rub. Can you give an example of where socialism / communism has worked. It's been tried in plenty of places. The answer is no. So ask your self why that is the case. The answer is it doesn't work. Don't misunderstand me though. I'm not an uncritical fan of American capitalism. In many ways I detest it; there are huge issues. But, its underlying principles make sense which is why it has survived where socialism has died. It needs people to figure out how best to make it work for everyone. What that is is another discussion - but I'd put true free trade at the top of the list. And serious jail time for financial corruption second. I've read quite a bit of Chmosky. Like I said he tires me out. Yes....you make a very valid argument . Communism struggles because of one human frailty ....Greed . Greed is the same the world over . Humans like greed , they thrive on it . It matters not if you are religious or not . Whenever I walk past the local church and see the scores of new cars on the car park , I ask myself how do they justify spending £25,000 on a new car , but only putting in a couple of quid in the collection box .? Why do people want to spend this kind of money of something that depreciates faster than a pair of gypo's drawers hitting the bushes ..... All this bullshit about comfort , safety , and being economical doesn't wash with me . It's pure vanity and ego . A weekly bus ticket round here is £18 and you can still only see the same old dreary rain out of the window . It's just the same with clothes .....I haven't bough new clothes in ten years . I don't have a clothes budget . My kids buy me stuff and it lasts me from one year to the next . Admitted I might be a scruffy bugger , but I'm comfortable wearing it . I don't give a shit about material things . As long as I can have somewhere to hang my cap every night and watch the football I'm happy . People have lost the most important thing in life .....happiness . They're too interested in keeping up with the Jones's ....they feel the urge to impress their peers . "Fuck em", is my attitude to all this .....it always ends in jealousy and envy and more often than not divorce. You don't need religion or some prophet to tell you how best to live your life . It's staring you in the face .....you just need to open your eyes and hearts . In my case that involves work , dogs , farting , eating pies and fishing . It does not involve mixing with pompous bastuurds at the local golf club discussing the merits of The Canaries or Marbella ....
|
|
|
Post by The Drunken Communist on May 29, 2015 12:31:58 GMT
Mate, stop cutting and pasting please. Does me yed in. Pack it in. Its a meessagesboard ffs ie "You're a knob" "knob?" "yes, knob!" "you're a f*****g c**t!" etc... You want be careful, ************** they'll be knowing it's you if you carry on & you'll be off on your holidays again.
|
|
|
Post by edgepotter on May 29, 2015 12:50:34 GMT
I get you - but here's the rub. Can you give an example of where socialism / communism has worked. It's been tried in plenty of places. The answer is no. So ask your self why that is the case. The answer is it doesn't work. Don't misunderstand me though. I'm not an uncritical fan of American capitalism. In many ways I detest it; there are huge issues. But, its underlying principles make sense which is why it has survived where socialism has died. It needs people to figure out how best to make it work for everyone. What that is is another discussion - but I'd put true free trade at the top of the list. And serious jail time for financial corruption second. I've read quite a bit of Chmosky. Like I said he tires me out. Yes....you make a very valid argument . Communism struggles because of one human frailty ....Greed . Greed is the same the world over . Humans like greed , they thrive on it . It matters not if you are religious or not . Whenever I walk past the local church and see the scores of new cars on the car park , I ask myself how do they justify spending £25,000 on a new car , but only putting in a couple of quid in the collection box .? Why do people want to spend this kind of money of something that depreciates faster than a pair of gypo's drawers hitting the bushes ..... All this bullshit about comfort , safety , and being economical doesn't wash with me . It's pure vanity and ego . A weekly bus ticket round here is £18 and you can still only see the same old dreary rain out of the window . It's just the same with clothes .....I haven't bough new clothes in ten years . I don't have a clothes budget . My kids buy me stuff and it lasts me from one year to the next . Admitted I might be a scruffy bugger , but I'm comfortable wearing it . I don't give a shit about material things . As long as I can have somewhere to hang my cap every night and watch the football I'm happy . People have lost the most important thing in life .....happiness . They're too interested in keeping up with the Jones's ....they feel the urge to impress their peers . "Fuck em", is my attitude to all this .....it always ends in jealousy and envy and more often than not divorce. You don't need religion or some prophet to tell you how best to live your life . It's staring you in the face .....you just need to open your eyes and hearts . In my case that involves work , dogs , farting , eating pies and fishing . It does not involve mixing with pompous bastuurds at the local golf club discussing the merits of The Canaries or Marbella .... I actually agree with a lot of what you've said above, it's a pity that you let yourself down with some of the other intolerant stuff you post
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on May 29, 2015 12:59:33 GMT
Yes....you make a very valid argument . Communism struggles because of one human frailty ....Greed . Greed is the same the world over . Humans like greed , they thrive on it . It matters not if you are religious or not . Whenever I walk past the local church and see the scores of new cars on the car park , I ask myself how do they justify spending £25,000 on a new car , but only putting in a couple of quid in the collection box .? Why do people want to spend this kind of money of something that depreciates faster than a pair of gypo's drawers hitting the bushes ..... All this bullshit about comfort , safety , and being economical doesn't wash with me . It's pure vanity and ego . A weekly bus ticket round here is £18 and you can still only see the same old dreary rain out of the window . It's just the same with clothes .....I haven't bough new clothes in ten years . I don't have a clothes budget . My kids buy me stuff and it lasts me from one year to the next . Admitted I might be a scruffy bugger , but I'm comfortable wearing it . I don't give a shit about material things . As long as I can have somewhere to hang my cap every night and watch the football I'm happy . People have lost the most important thing in life .....happiness . They're too interested in keeping up with the Jones's ....they feel the urge to impress their peers . "Fuck em", is my attitude to all this .....it always ends in jealousy and envy and more often than not divorce. You don't need religion or some prophet to tell you how best to live your life . It's staring you in the face .....you just need to open your eyes and hearts . In my case that involves work , dogs , farting , eating pies and fishing . It does not involve mixing with pompous bastuurds at the local golf club discussing the merits of The Canaries or Marbella .... I actually agree with a lot of what you've said above, it's a pity that you let yourself down with some of the other intolerant stuff you post No one told me I should tolerate homosexuals and other things regarded as moral sins as described in the bible . I don't like my home towns cultural heritage diluted by foreigners either . Do not tell me where I let myself down or I might tell you something very rude . I live my life how I want to . I don't tell you how to live yours . Mumf
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on May 29, 2015 13:03:06 GMT
Yes....you make a very valid argument . Communism struggles because of one human frailty ....Greed . Greed is the same the world over . Humans like greed , they thrive on it . It matters not if you are religious or not . Whenever I walk past the local church and see the scores of new cars on the car park , I ask myself how do they justify spending £25,000 on a new car , but only putting in a couple of quid in the collection box .? Why do people want to spend this kind of money of something that depreciates faster than a pair of gypo's drawers hitting the bushes ..... All this bullshit about comfort , safety , and being economical doesn't wash with me . It's pure vanity and ego . A weekly bus ticket round here is £18 and you can still only see the same old dreary rain out of the window . It's just the same with clothes .....I haven't bough new clothes in ten years . I don't have a clothes budget . My kids buy me stuff and it lasts me from one year to the next . Admitted I might be a scruffy bugger , but I'm comfortable wearing it . I don't give a shit about material things . As long as I can have somewhere to hang my cap every night and watch the football I'm happy . People have lost the most important thing in life .....happiness . They're too interested in keeping up with the Jones's ....they feel the urge to impress their peers . "Fuck em", is my attitude to all this .....it always ends in jealousy and envy and more often than not divorce. You don't need religion or some prophet to tell you how best to live your life . It's staring you in the face .....you just need to open your eyes and hearts . In my case that involves work , dogs , farting , eating pies and fishing . It does not involve mixing with pompous bastuurds at the local golf club discussing the merits of The Canaries or Marbella .... I actually agree with a lot of what you've said above, it's a pity that you let yourself down with some of the other intolerant stuff you post Yes very intolerant , there is nothing wrong with discussing the merits of The Canaries or Marbella
|
|
|
Post by followyoudown on May 29, 2015 14:12:45 GMT
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on May 29, 2015 20:45:48 GMT
Mate, stop cutting and pasting please. Does me yed in. Pack it in. Its a meessagesboard ffs ie "You're a knob" "knob?" "yes, knob!" "you're a f*****g c**t!" etc... You want be careful, ************** they'll be knowing it's you if you carry on & you'll be off on your holidays again. I think you have the wrong person mate.
|
|
|
Post by ukcstokie on May 29, 2015 21:32:46 GMT
As one of the comments says... "Actually Farage recommended Suzanne Evans as interim leader upon his resignation being accepted. It wasn't accepted so she was never leader. So the above BBC subtitle is utter bollocks" As per normal FYD, you love playing the man and not the ball.
|
|
|
Post by partickpotter on May 30, 2015 5:38:54 GMT
As one of the comments says... "Actually Farage recommended Suzanne Evans as interim leader upon his resignation being accepted. It wasn't accepted so she was never leader. So the above BBC subtitle is utter bollocks" As per normal FYD, you love playing the man and not the ball. Is Suzanne Evans a man? Wait till the Mail gets hold of that!
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on May 30, 2015 6:02:21 GMT
I don't remember Tony Benn ever supporting New Labour. He was one of it's fiercest crics. I was at the Anti-War Demo in London along with a couple of million other people & heard Tony Benn destroy New Labour/ Blair in a speech ridiculing the notion of WMD & warning of the long term implications of bombing Iraq. Very true...he hated blair for turning labour into a "Thatcherite party".....his words
|
|
|
Post by bigjohnritchie on May 30, 2015 6:44:15 GMT
I don't remember Tony Benn ever supporting New Labour. He was one of it's fiercest crics. I was at the Anti-War Demo in London along with a couple of million other people & heard Tony Benn destroy New Labour/ Blair in a speech ridiculing the notion of WMD & warning of the long term implications of bombing Iraq. Very true...he hated blair for turning labour into a "Thatcherite party".....his words Wizard, I agree entirely, but my point earlier was about principles when I said'.... Tony Benn compromised in his support of New Labour, being a lesser evil than Thatcher'..In other words ,he was pragmatic and did not leave the party.He said that himself too.( March 21, 1978, of his diaries)
|
|
|
Post by followyoudown on May 30, 2015 8:10:54 GMT
As one of the comments says... "Actually Farage recommended Suzanne Evans as interim leader upon his resignation being accepted. It wasn't accepted so she was never leader. So the above BBC subtitle is utter bollocks" As per normal FYD, you love playing the man and not the ball. So Nige recommended to himself that Evans should be leader before he decided to tell himself he wouldn't accept the resignation letter he wrote to himself, got it now. The main point is he has made himself a laughing stock and has gone back on his word and you can dress it up in all the mealy mouthed wording you want but he dropped a major clanger something even those inside his party realised although of course those who said anything have now been sacked.
|
|
|
Post by partickpotter on May 30, 2015 9:14:10 GMT
As one of the comments says... "Actually Farage recommended Suzanne Evans as interim leader upon his resignation being accepted. It wasn't accepted so she was never leader. So the above BBC subtitle is utter bollocks" As per normal FYD, you love playing the man and not the ball. So Nige recommended to himself that Evans should be leader before he decided to tell himself he wouldn't accept the resignation letter he wrote to himself, got it now. The main point is he has made himself a laughing stock and has gone back on his word and you can dress it up in all the mealy mouthed wording you want but he dropped a major clanger something even those inside his party realised although of course those who said anything have now been sacked. I don't think he made a laughing stock of himself by coming back. For sure he was going to be on the end of some derision, but the truth is, unlike Milliband and Clegg, his party performed very well at the election. In the long run, most folk won't bother with the resignation stunt and look at the success he achieves (or not). Now - if he loses the a Referendum by a significant distance, I reckon he'll have to go. And he will do. His race will have been run.
|
|
|
Post by wizzardofdribble on Jun 1, 2015 8:52:54 GMT
I don't remember Tony Benn ever supporting New Labour. He was one of it's fiercest crics. I was at the Anti-War Demo in London along with a couple of million other people & heard Tony Benn destroy New Labour/ Blair in a speech ridiculing the notion of WMD & warning of the long term implications of bombing Iraq. Very true...he hated blair for turning labour into a "Thatcherite party".....his words Exactly what they're trying to do again frase...Despite the fact that Cameron is shrewd enough to try and occupy the centre ground which leaves Labour with no where to go. They need to do some thinking outside the box or they're out of office for a generation.
|
|