Hasbeen I could post twenty items supporting your statement about the people who did that to your son.
It was and is the same people who turned Sydneys west in to a shooting gallery.
Lexi like I once walked those streets I am sure if she saw them now she would be shocked.
Read this mornings Sydney morning herald online.
But be prepared to be shocked.
Not by the usual Lebanese this time.
Syrians from different sides of their faith being threatened and bashed, forced out of business, in broad daylight, in Bankstown!
Ignore the truth but bit remains true, we have imported horror for many.

Dear Yuyutsu,

We just disagree.

You wrote:"I was referring to an ideal rather than to our historical past, which we all know was bloody. Ideals may or may not exist, or perhaps may have existed on another planet, but they may be legitimately considered, like the imaginary number 'i', when assessing our policies in the 'real' world. Similarly, I referred to spiritual enlightenment, rather than the so-called 'enlightenment' period in Western history (1700-1800). I certainly am not wishing for a repeat of the rule of historical monarchs and historical corrupt churches."

As far as I am concerned it is not ideal to have a monarch. I get no meaning from the words 'spiritual enlightenment' and would not apply the adjective, so-called, to the enlightenment period in Western history. That period in history opened up possibilities which had not existed before. Imaginary and real as terms used in mathematics are not the same as those words used in ordinary language. All numbers are imaginary since they are creations of the mind. Your imaginary ideal is not like the imaginary number i. Your imaginary ideal has no function. The imaginary number serves a purpose in electrical engineering and many other applications.

Dear Hasbeen,

I sympathise with your feelings about what happened to your son.

Dear David,

Do we in fact disagree that if we are to have some kind of "law and order", even the minimum, then it better be enforced by a decent, wise, loving, caring and independent king rather than by the median of the vulgar, foolish, selfish and easily-incited mob?

Of course there is the option of not having any "law and order" at all, which is fine if you are ready for it. I personally wouldn't go that far.

<<That period in history opened up possibilities which had not existed before.>>

For a millennium or two, in and around Europe.

This was certainly better than nothing, but still a far cry from enlightenment - the realisation of one's true nature as God, thus lifting the bondage of false identification with one's body and mind and being released from the painful illusion of birth and death.

<<All numbers are imaginary since they are creations of the mind.>>

And so is this world of objective existence.

Dear Yuyutsu,

"Do we in fact disagree that if we are to have some kind of "law and order", even the minimum, then it better be enforced by a decent, wise, loving, caring and independent king rather than by the median of the vulgar, foolish, selfish and easily-incited mob?"

The evidence is that kings are rarely 'decent, wise, loving, caring and independent'. However, people who are afraid of democracy characterise the people as a 'vulgar, foolish, selfish and easily-incited mob'.

I favour education in critical thinking and the mechanisms of democracy and the opportunity for discussion and debate so that people are not a 'vulgar, foolish, selfish and easily-incited mob'. I trust a well-educated and informed people to know better what is good for them than any monarch. The historical evidence is that a king is isolated from the people and is far more likely to be vulgar, foolish, selfish and easily-incited than the general public. Kings in general are isolated from the consequences of their acts. Ordinary people are not. The mass of ordinary people have a wisdom denied to kings.

Alexander wept because he had no more worlds to conquer. He was a stupid sod. Most ordinary people know there are far more worthwhile things to do with one's life than to go around killing and acquiring territory.

You also wrote: "the realisation of one's true nature as God"

That is meaningless nonsense.

You wrote: And so is this world of objective existence [imaginary].

This world of objective existence is the only real world.

You may answer, but I probably won't respond.

Here you go, rehctub,

More evidence that good "old Australia" is still alive and well - and as intolerant as ever.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-05-02/aboriginal-actors-racially-abused-in-melbourne/4664752

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2012-12-05/taxi-driver-refuses-to-pick-up-singer-gurrumul/4409100