Hi loudmouth
Yes Monty Python did a brilliant parody of religion, with all its absurdities laid bare; they don’t make comedy like that anymore.

As this period in history is not one I am familiar with, I looked on the internet for a bit of clarification. What I soon learned is the truth of history depends on whose version of it you are reading. Even the scholars of the time, who say they were there, have had their works “interpreted” by one point of view or another.

So have a look at these two and make comment if you wish, but to be honest the only time that interests me is since WW2.

http://www.soundvision.com/article/muslim-christian-relations-the-good-the-bad

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Crusade

The west’s meddling in the affairs of the middle east starting with the over throw of Musadek in Iran in the early 50, to the random drone programs, which Obama has intensified since being started in the Bush 2 era, have created a hot bed of insurgency against the west. Add to that the unquestioning support of Israel’s slow strangulation of Gaze and annexation of the West Bank, you have all the ingredients you need for a world of turmoil.

The Saudi’s are the ones funding the Wahhabi's who make up a significantly large percentage of the caliphate population, that Isis has proclaimed amid the ruble of western created nations.

They idea that you can wipe out militarily a political/religious belief that Isis promotes, as many on the political right believe, is myopic at the very least.

Neither I nor anyone else I know in the left see these organizations as sane, stable, or compatible with the world as we would have it. Isolation, denigration, and the death of many of their “martyrs” simply strengthens their resolve. There has to be a dialogue between the moderates of all religions, to find what we have in common as opposed to demonizing the moderates for not doing enough.

TBC

LEFTY ONE,

In regards to immigrants and farming. My theory is this:
If Australians need to rely on immigrants in order to farm, then we shouldn't farm in the first place.
If we can't figure out how to grow it ourselves we don't deserve to eat it.
But it does get complicated given that what we can grow under Australian wages we can buy twice as much from a foreign country.

Immigrants need to embrace our country first before we should reasonably be expected to embrace any of them.
We're often told that its commonly known Australians are racist.
Well if it is commonly known then why did they come here?
What did they expect?
That they fight for years over lands and it's the reason they end up fleeing wherever they come from, and that we're evil because we won't just hand our nation over to them?

Multiculturalism?
I get so peed off by foreigners who try to justify pushing their own cultures upon us by saying -
"Well you Australians don't have any culture anyway"
That's bloody well right!
Our culture is to not have a culture; and we sure as hell don't bloody well want yours.

The traditional inhabitants are never the ones pushing immigration anyway.
Its bankers and economists that do it.

"Tracey McNaughton, head of investment strategy at UBS Asset Management, says that the consequences of growing nationalism could force the bond market to finally become more discriminating in the way it prices sovereign risk."

G20 needs to reverse its protectionist ways: UBS
(Or in other words: Bankers and Economists want Elected Leaders to Sell Out Their Own Citizens)

http://www.afr.com/markets/debt-markets/g20-needs-to-reverse-its-protectionist-ways-ubs-20160906-grahlw

You know George Soros (Open Border and Financial backer of Hillary) is a frontman for the Rothschild's (Private Central Bankers) and the whole world is just a battleground for global hegemony.

They push the wars and imperialism, and the citizens of nations who take on immigrants clean up the mess.
You think these people give a crap?
They already live in gated communities.

Hi Lefty,

As you write, "They idea that you can wipe out militarily a political/religious belief that Isis promotes, as many on the political right believe, is myopic at the very least."

Yes, indeed: like any other religion, Islam spawns extreme interpretations of its books, its message, and will keep doing so long after ISIS is defeated, perhaps more so, again and again. After all, defeat will only be another provocation by the West against the most reactionary elements within Islam. Any religion which looks backwards (and don't they all ?) is bound, when pushed by its most extreme zealots, to retreat to an ever more reactionary position. There will be no let-up until Islam is either 'reformed' or cast aside.

Well, there's the twenty-first century taken care of.

Yes, like other powers, the Yanks have meddled incessantly in other countries' affairs: the ousting of Mossadeq (and possibly his murder in Paris in 1966) by the CIA, and of Arbenz in Guatemala at about the same time, were clearly to advance the interests of powerful US companies. No argument there. And do you think that the Saudis (i.e. Wahhabis, i.e. uncles of ISIS) aren't meddling in Islamist affairs everywhere they have set up mosques ? Perhaps not in Laos :)

And as you also write,

"Neither I nor anyone else I know in the left see these organizations as sane, stable, or compatible with the world as we would have it. Isolation, denigration, and the death of many of their “martyrs” simply strengthens their resolve. There has to be a dialogue between the moderates of all religions, to find what we have in common as opposed to demonizing the moderates for not doing enough."

I would add the proviso to beware of quietly-spoken, neatly-dressed, ever-so-dignified imams who gradually, slowly, bit by bit, will ask for the introduction of Shari'a law (perhaps at first just for Muslims) while gently pointing out the spectre of Islamist terrorism as a sort of ever-threatening alternative, to encourage 'dialogue'. In that sense, terrorism will have served its purpose. Bad cop/good cop.

Kob chai der,

Joe

Hi Lefty,

As a do-nothing wind bag, on the issue of furthering democracy (in its best sense), I agree with you (and Marx's Thesis Eleven) that it is easier to describe a situation than to do anything about it.

As an ex-socialist, I would suggest that for any society to be 'better than democracy', it has to build on democracy rather than try to subvert and replace it with something else, which invariably becomes totalitarian. Equality before the law, freedom of expression, freedom for scientific investigation, eternal scepticism and a tolerance for uncertainty and incompleteness seem to be a good place to start. So we do what we can within that framework.

I'm with Karl Popper who, in his last years, tried to synthesise socialism with the best of liberalism, and supported piecemeal improvements rather than 'revolutionary' giant steps. Very insufficient, not flashy enough from a young person's point of view, but dull and sensible from an old fart's point of view :)

Cheers,

Joe

Armchair Critic
Immigrants and farming, I was talking about the US.

Food production around the world is done using a production factory system, which ignores the laws of nature. Why do you think the health industry is so large today, could it be illness created by the consumption of crap, instead of real food?

Embraces the original culture, you mean as the European did as they advanced around the world over the last 500 years?

I had the privilege of travelling through the Middle East over forty years ago; I did not see any violence similar to that which is occurring today, after the west got involved in their civil wars.

Australia does have a culture, as does everywhere else. If you want to know what a nations culture is just look for the biggest building that hold the most people. Clearly in the west it is no longer the Christian church.

Not sure about your next points, although I would agree that the world of finance is the greatest threat of all.
Chris

Hi Lefty,

Biggest building ? Do you mean the MCG ? More than a million people watched the fantastic exhibition women's AFL match on TV a week ago. Did you have that in mind ?

Fascinating: you write, " .... travelling through the Middle East over forty years ago; I did not see any violence similar to that which is occurring today, after the west got involved in their civil wars."

Knocking around Indigenous affairs, I'm used to people externalising all their self-made problems. Has it occurred to you that the growing gap between the West and Muslim society, and people's perception of that gap, and why it has occurred as they see it, may have provoked the backward-looking reactions of some people there ? That ultimately, Islam dictates that progress is evil, and what they see being enjoyed in the west is therefore evil ? Therefore the West is evil ? And that any progress, say in health or women's education, in fact any whiff of better rights for women, is viewed with alarm in such reactionary societies ?

Still, you can't hold back human progress, which is ever-present around the Muslim world. Imams may preach that the world is flat, that the sun goes around the earth, but science and technology progress elsewhere, two steps forward, maybe one step back, but inexorably forward. Backward-looking belief systems fall ever more behind.

Cheers,

Joe