Korean Job Discussion Forums :: View topic

Speak Korean Now!

Teach English Abroad and Get Paid to see the World!

Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"

FAQ

Memberlist

Usergroups

Profile

The Libyan War
Goto page Previous 1, 2, 3 ... 84, 85, 86, 87, 88, 89 Next

Korean Job Discussion Forums Forum Index -> Current Events Forum

View previous topic :: View next topic

Author

Message

Titus

Joined: 19 May 2012

Posted: Wed Sep 19, 2012 8:07 am Post subject:

Fox wrote:

As an aside, I'll reiterate that I wish we could get past this whole idea that people are how they are because they've been carefully shaped by some social-elite equivalent of the unmoved mover. This idea was weak when it was last articulated, and it is even harder to take seriously now that it's made it's return as "The Cathedral," which, "Rules our minds because it controls the flow of information and opinion." I understand melodrama is fun sometimes, but come on, while some intellectual gatekeeping certainly occurs (and always has), you are describing a level of coordinated intentionality that is simply unjustified, and denying agency to the common man while simultaneously demonstrating that he has agency through your own rejection of the status quo; you yourself are the living counter-argument to your position.

Nonsense. A perfect example is gay marriage. 20 years ago the idea of two men being married was ridiculous. The Cathedral stepped up. Sitcoms, newspapers, movies, academia all got on page and changed the values of the hive. Culture is top ----> down.

This is why advertising is big business. It works. The right mix of sounds, images, association and individuals all of a sudden have a new want (or or a new need!). It's effective. It's everywhere. I don't know why you'd deny it.

Titus

Joined: 19 May 2012

Posted: Wed Sep 19, 2012 8:14 am Post subject:

Fox wrote:

Titus wrote:

The people have replaced God with the state. The state isn't *actually* god.

Nothing is "actually" God, that's why the state has been able to so casually yet effectively utilize the concept of the divine in its service throughout history. But writing out a convincing (to a hostile audience) argument for that would require more effort than I am willing to put in these days, which is why I deleted my post.

Titus wrote:

I don't think you'd argue that Sweden obsesses over markets.

Yes, actually, I would. Sweden is completely obsessed with markets. The point of their economic regulations is not, after all, to stifle their markets, but rather, to cultivate them and ensure access to them. Swedish feminism, for example, isn't about empowering women (whatever that means), it's about ensuring their women are out there in the work force serving the Market God, instead of behaving like real, natural humans are inclined to behave. It's just a different -- and less honest -- branch of the same, perverse "religion."

-edit: spelling

This week I read (daily mail? can't remember) that 75% of women would prefer to stay home and raise their kids if they could afford.

I'm very confident 25% of women were engaging in the amazing female ability to rationalize their situation (I'm big boned, etc). My spouse doesn't work and her feminist friends are wildly jealous of her, but then will go on to speak of a war on women, the pay gap, this and that. The Swedish women work b/c men are checking out of the marriage market and because inflation has eroded the ability for one income families and also because "Advertising has us chasing cars and clothes, working jobs we hate so we can buy shit we don't need."

Titus

Joined: 19 May 2012

Posted: Wed Sep 19, 2012 8:32 am Post subject:

Kuros wrote:

Its perfectly possible that liberal Libyans will want to watch Wagner after a long day at work.

The Wagner reference has had me chuckling for a couple days now.

Fox

Joined: 04 Mar 2009

Posted: Wed Sep 19, 2012 4:12 pm Post subject:

Titus wrote:

The Swedish women work b/c men are checking out of the marriage market and because inflation has eroded the ability for one income families and also because "Advertising has us chasing cars and clothes, working jobs we hate so we can buy shit we don't need."

Well, I definitely think the urge to chase "shit products" is complicit in the phenomenon to some degree, and this is a manifestation of the market-worship I mentioned before; buying expensive bags and designer clothes are an implicit acknowledgement of the "virtue of consumption." Devaluation of labor in general also plays a role, though that's circular: the inclusion at large of females in the work force vastly increases labor supply, and thus cannot help but devalue it. Doubly so since companies have to bloat up their non-productive middle-management sectors in order to accommodate adequate female participation. My twice-divorced mother is one of these people, and what she does for a living is completely non-productive.

There's also, however, a strong cultural impetus. Take this non-Swedish woman's experience in Sweden for example.

Quote:

Personally, I don�t know any stay-at-home moms in Sweden today. I met one a few years ago among a group of otherwise career-oriented women. The conversation soon turned to work and I distinctly remember the feeling in the room when she revealed she had two kids but no job. It certainly wasn�t envy and it clearly was contempt. That�s because stay-at-home moms have it easy don�t they�?

The Swedish parental leave system makes little room for wannabe homemakers. It limits choice and promotes conformity. I�d say the pattern is pretty much the same across the board. The 480 days of maternity leave is shared between mother and father. Mom takes between 10-13 months and is then ushered back to her day job while dad takes over the remaining 3-6 months. The occupation of stay-at-home mom doesn�t seem exist in Sweden and, even for the few who would dare to admit they would want their house as their workplace, society doesn�t deem it acceptable. But isn�t being a mom the hardest full-time job in the world�?

Encouraging mothers back into the labour market has had a beneficial effect on Sweden�s economy and, it has to be said, the system supports parents that work. Part-time possibilities come as standard as does social security cover for time off to look after sick children.

However, it seems this theory doesn�t quite hold true for everyone in Sweden today. Last week, a report from think-tank ESO states the parental leave system is preventing immigrant women from joining the workforce. Instead they choose to use the system as a means to stay at home.

This goes beyond women just lusting after bags and clothes, and even beyond needing to work due to financial factors. Female participation in the work force is seen as an end in itself, so much so that foreign women who make use of the parental-leave system to actually be stay at home mothers are perversely seen as a problem to be solved. The stay at home mom is in Sweden today what a woman who didn't go to church would have been in ages past; passing on a career is virtual blasphemy. It's totally screwed up.

Sweden is discovering the cost of pushing mothers back into work.

This article references 7 in 10 Swedish mothers wanting to spend more time with their kids. The temptation of bags and clothes only goes so far: these women are in a society which demands their participation in the market cult.

Titus

Joined: 19 May 2012

Posted: Sat Sep 22, 2012 8:08 am Post subject:

Quote:

Female participation in the work force is seen as an end in itself, so much so that foreign women who make use of the parental-leave system to actually be stay at home mothers are perversely seen as a problem to be solved.

That's right. You see capitalism or markets and I see cultural elites drenched in anti-traditionalistic ideals. I believe they use marketing, inflation and most importantly a revaluation of values though media, academia etc (The Cathedral) to achieve their ends.

I read something amusing this week that you'll appreciate. Feminists first wanted women to become men, then men to become women and after both failed decided instead to be permanently disagreeable. True.

Titus

Joined: 19 May 2012

Posted: Sat Sep 22, 2012 8:37 am Post subject:

Fox, check out the essay Sexual Utopia in Power by F. Roger Devlin. It's pretty darn good, though brushes up against crazy in some sections.

bucheon bum

Joined: 16 Jan 2003

Posted: Sat Sep 22, 2012 1:11 pm Post subject:

Islamist Militia Bases Stormed in Benghazi

Quote:

The militia suspected of killing the US ambassador to Libya nearly two weeks ago has been driven out of its base in the eastern city of Benghazi.

Police and protesters stormed the HQ of the Islamist group Ansar al-Sharia.

Fox

Joined: 04 Mar 2009

Posted: Sat Sep 22, 2012 5:23 pm Post subject:

I had not noticed this:

Titus wrote:

Fox wrote:

Unconvincing. Anyone who is willing to let gay marriage slide because of "Will and Grace" was never really against it in their heart in the first place, which is illustrative of the real situation here: homophobic discrimination, at large, was always a religious phenomenon. As people -- not because of any conspiracy, but simply as an unavoidable consequence of coming to more genuinely understanding the world -- turned away from religion, the general motive for hating gays was lost, which created a natural cultural opening for homosexuals to work towards acceptance. The populace becomes less ignorant, the populace begins to take their mythological texts less seriously, the religious zeal weakens, the anti-homosexual sentiment said zeal was fuelling weakens with it, and man's desire to be humane to man leads to tolerance. Certainly, media and academic elements play a role in this phenomenon, not because they are intrinsically malicious, but because they are a part of society. That is not equivalent, however, to some sort of conspiracy. I for one see no issue at all in ending discrimination against homosexuals. Am I brainwashed, or merely reasonable? Moreover, if I am brainwashed, why am I not equally brainwashed regarding race and gender?

This whole, "Church good, every other social institution bad," idea you have here -- and given you discluded religious institutions from your Cathedral-lineup, that is what this all amounts to, something especially perverse given you claim to not want Church rule -- is a relic of a previous era, and one indicative of the Church's long previous role as an aspect of the state. There is a reason the Old Testament is full of laws, after all: religion, at large, has always been a tool of the state to induce social order. God has no reason to care about whether you pull out of your wife before ejaculating, or whether you spend your nights with your wife or with some guy, but a small state in need of population growth does. It has always been about state ends. Indeed, it was so effective in that role that people are still clamoring to serve it even after it was cast aside.

You do not get to lay the state of Western Civilization at the feet of the elite alone; the common man bears just as much credit, for better, and for worse, and many of the things you want so much to blame upon a hostile elite are really merely cases of you being at odds with your common man. I share your frustrations on certain matters, but I will not let that cloud my vision; my ability to accept or reject what I read in the news is proof positive that my fellow man can do the same. I will not deny him his agency, no matter how comforting it may be to do so.

Leon

Joined: 31 May 2010

Posted: Sat Sep 22, 2012 5:40 pm Post subject:

Titus wrote:

Fox wrote:

Titus wrote:

The people have replaced God with the state. The state isn't *actually* god.

Titus wrote:

I don't think you'd argue that Sweden obsesses over markets.

So what's better a system where some women feel pressured to work, but have the option of not working if they chose, or a system where women who do want to work do not have that choice, or have only a very small range of choices where they are paid at a rate less than that of their peers because of their sex? Furthermore, what percentage of people, in general, would honestly want to work if they financially did not have to. The idea that a job should be intellectually rewarding and socially stimulating is fine, but how many people find themselves at work out of financial necessity rather than out of a desire for that work. More than culture, economics demand, in many cases, both spouses working, which is hardly a case of liberal culture and more of a case of the changing structure of the entire economy. As to your previous statements comparing Lady Gaga and Chopin, that is an absurd statement to make because it assumes that there wasn't terrible popular music being made during the times of Chopin. Also, it shows this sort of idea that culture should be reserved for the elites of society. How many of the lower classes were able to go and see classical performances? You seem to have this false idea the good old days, but in pretty much every way quality of life has improved. I would rather have people chasing crass products, which the rich and elite throughout all of human history have done, than worrying about just providing for their basic survival needs. I'd rather have this vacuous current popular culture, which honestly when hasn't popular culture been crass, and have pretty much everybody have the chance to access any sort of culture or entertainment they want, then have that to be the privilege of only the elites. One last thing, when you look to the past you only see the things that stood the test of time, you don't see of the books or plays or music most people were actually consuming. In the future will people remember GaGa?

On the Libyan front, anyone who expects things to go smoothly after a revolution, especially in a country which had an authoritarian leader and no real history of freedom or democracy, is thinking clearly. It also doesn't help that their are tons of loose weapons in the country, and foreign fighters, and that the society is in a transition period. I think the liberalism that Titus despises would serve them well, at least in the beginning, while they are working to set up their own societies.

Titus

Joined: 19 May 2012

Posted: Sun Sep 23, 2012 9:37 am Post subject:

Quote:

You go from the first portion to "furthermore" as if it was some kind of accomplishment.

If women are not producing more children our group is toast. All the high IQ northern peoples (Asiatics and Caucasians) are not producing enough kids. Female liberation is suicide. From a biological standpoint the female role is very clear: Produce more humans. The HR departments of firms will have to do without female labor or we perish.

Quote:

Unconvincing. Anyone who is willing to let gay marriage slide because of "Will and Grace" was never really against it in their heart in the first place

American values are whatever was on TV last night.

Quote:

This whole, "Church good, every other social institution bad," idea you have here -- and given you discluded religious institutions from your Cathedral-lineup, that is what this all amounts to,

Church? You've taken from my argument that I highly value the church?

Quote:

You do not get to lay the state of Western Civilization at the feet of the elite alone; the common man bears just as much credit

The average American spends the majority of his free time fermenting on a sofa while consuming mass media. The media determines what he values, aspires to, what he thinks is right and wrong. The vast, vast majority of our species will never have the slightest out of box idea in their whole lives.

Titus

Joined: 19 May 2012

Posted: Sun Sep 23, 2012 9:50 am Post subject:

Quote:

I think the liberalism that Titus despises would serve them well, at least in the beginning, while they are working to set up their own societies.

There is no "they" there. There are competing tribes and clans.

Fox

Joined: 04 Mar 2009

Posted: Sun Sep 23, 2012 3:00 pm Post subject:

Titus wrote:

Quote:

This whole, "Church good, every other social institution bad," idea you have here -- and given you discluded religious institutions from your Cathedral-lineup, that is what this all amounts to,

Church? You've taken from my argument that I highly value the church?

Not precisely, since as I mentioned in the remaining portion of the sentence you sawed in half there, you have clearly stated you do not want Church rule. None the less, the intrinsic validity of the Church -- the only social institution other than family not demonized by your position, and an institution you've specifically defended against the allegation of being an element of state control, despite its clear propensity for control, and it's clear history of colluding with the state, well before Constantine -- is a built-in element of your case, which probably goes to show the danger of picking up ideas crafted by others and running with them too vigorously.

Titus wrote:

Quote:

You do not get to lay the state of Western Civilization at the feet of the elite alone; the common man bears just as much credit

The average American spends the majority of his free time fermenting on a sofa while consuming mass media.

If so, this is a choice, even if one you or I would deem self-destructive. He has agency, and could act otherwise insofar as any of us could. The media certainly affects TV watchers with its output, but those fellows on the couch with a soda? They shape the media in return, with every click of the remote. The History Channel turns into the "aliens and lumberjacks" channel not by malice, but by this simple, mindless process of interactions between airings and remote-clicks. One could just as easily rage against the common man for making broadcast media what it is today, and it would be equally questionable: the entire world is a study in cycles, and human society is not exempt from this.

Titus wrote:

The media determines what he values, aspires to, what he thinks is right and wrong. The vast, vast majority of our species will never have the slightest out of box idea in their whole lives.

I'm inclined to agree, I'm simply not inclined to exempt the societal elite from this. "I want money, how about I make seductive advertisements to sell my terrible products?" is not thinking outside the box. "Teenagers like vapid, edgy stuff, let's sell some Lady Gaga CDs," is not outside the box. Usurers are not outside the box. Government is not outside the box. That's what I'm getting at here: to the extent that things have gone wrong -- or ever go wrong on a large scale in society -- there's no real "bad guys;" such things are more like a natural catastrophe than a conspiracy. You want to blame someone, something I understand, but the world is not so generous as to formulate the facts to fit your desires.

Leon

Joined: 31 May 2010

Posted: Sun Sep 23, 2012 4:27 pm Post subject:

Titus wrote:

Quote:

I think the liberalism that Titus despises would serve them well, at least in the beginning, while they are working to set up their own societies.

There is no "they" there. There are competing tribes and clans.

Yes and no, there is a they because they are all part of the same nation. Is that a good thing, no, but it is the way the world currently operates. Obviously the artificial lines are a major problem in Africa, but if they are too succeed it will be as a modern nation state. If that means a weak central state with somewhat autonomous regions, then all the better for their current problems.

Leon

Joined: 31 May 2010

Posted: Sun Sep 23, 2012 4:38 pm Post subject:

Titus wrote:

Quote:

You do realizing that the human population is expanding at exponential rates, and that the faster we expand the faster we will use our resources, the faster poverty and pollution will grow? Societies like Japan and Sweden and Norway do have a problem with their birthrate. That problem pales in comparison with countries, such as in the Arab world, where the birthrate is expanding faster than society can deal with. Liberalism has given places like Norway and Sweden the highest standards of living in the world, yet you would point at a few problems and and act like it was an overarching condemnation of society as a whole.

Fox

Joined: 04 Mar 2009

Posted: Sun Sep 23, 2012 5:01 pm Post subject:

Low fertility rates are society killers. Having a fertility rate of 1.2 but a high standard of living is the societal equivalent of being a dying old man in a very expensive nursing home. As strange as it might sound, material standard of living is not necessarily an unqualified good.

Display posts from previous:

	Korean Job Discussion Forums Forum Index -> Current Events Forum	All times are GMT - 8 Hours Goto page Previous 1, 2, 3 ... 84, 85, 86, 87, 88, 89 Next
Page 85 of 89

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum

TEFL International Supports Dave's ESL Cafe