Riots in the city of love

[Gary Childress]

Europe sounds like a mess. Do the Russians and Chinese ever experience civil unrest? Maybe relative democracy and freedom are bad things?

[Gary Childress]

Strangely enough, there weren't many in the way of riots in Nazi Germany or Imperial Japan either during the Second World War. Corrupt dictatorship, much better. So maybe Trump will move us in the right direction. I give up.

[FlashDangerpants]

Europe sounds like a mess.

It certainly does if you let Fox News and Immanuel Can describe it to you. I will be on the Eurostar to Belgium tomorrow, spending a few days in scenic Lueven. I will be sure to let everyone know many Islamic rape gangs I run into.

From reading this site as it slowly descends in neo-nazi racial-separate-but-equalness, I expect to experience at least 5 circumcisions and 12 exhaustive plunderings of my anal cavity. Worse still, I will also get dragged around a Stella Artois brewery.

[Immanuel Can]

Europe sounds like a mess. Do the Russians and Chinese ever experience civil unrest? Maybe relative democracy and freedom are bad things?

Oh, the one thing totalitarian regimes are very good at is imposing civic order. They simply kill their dissidents. It's very effective, at least for a time...but I doubt that you and I want to see that sort of expedient practiced more broadly.

If you remember the Tiananmen Square Massacre (1989), then you know that even totalitarian regimes of the most brutal sort are subject to demonstrations when they show cracks in their iron resolve to repress the general population -- even the most wicked, homicidal, Socialist regimes, like the Chinese, can occasionally teeter on the brink of civic unrest. Even Xi, for all his power, has to remain paranoid of enemies who would gladly pull him down and take his place. So leaders of Socialist totalitarian states have to live in a state of high anxiety.

Thus, it has nothing to do with democracy...far less with what you have, which is actually constitutional republicanism, not democracy. It has to do with the fact that there are always forces trying to stabilize the existing order, and those determined to defeat them. And if there is ever a truly "good" side of such conflicts, you won't know which is the "good" side until you make more precise inquiries into what it is that is behind each.

[MikeNovack]

Strangely enough, there weren't many in the way of riots in Nazi Germany or Imperial Japan either during the Second World War. Corrupt dictatorship, much better. So maybe Trump will move us in the right direction. I give up.

Actually, in Nazi Germany there was the (successful) Rosenstrasse protest (1943).

[Janoah]

Yes, perhaps now there is also a revolution of prostitutes there, like in Perrault, Little Red Riding Hood woke up and began to give herself with revolutionary fury to the dark wolf in the keffiyeh.
And what about Belgium, Britain, are they there without revolutionary fervor, lazily giving in?

There are now riots in Belgium and Spain, some smaller upheavals in Greece and Italy, and both riots and counter-marches in England, in Scotland and in Ireland. It looks like things are moving toward some sort of more serious and direct clash. But we'll see.

And what does Europe have to counter them in terms of worldview?

Medieval knights with pots on their heads?

They know about the failure of the failed Trinity from the Quran.

They use idolized democracy as a demographic bomb.

So what philosophical thing does Europe have to grasp onto?

(In fact, even the name Europe is the name of our Asian princess, who was stolen to Crete

by the way, yesterday we remembered Belgium, and today it reminds us of itself.

[Immanuel Can]

Yes, perhaps now there is also a revolution of prostitutes there, like in Perrault, Little Red Riding Hood woke up and began to give herself with revolutionary fury to the dark wolf in the keffiyeh.
And what about Belgium, Britain, are they there without revolutionary fervor, lazily giving in?

There are now riots in Belgium and Spain, some smaller upheavals in Greece and Italy, and both riots and counter-marches in England, in Scotland and in Ireland. It looks like things are moving toward some sort of more serious and direct clash. But we'll see.

And what does Europe have to counter them in terms of worldview?

This is a very serious problem. Having abandoned the metaphysical grounding of the Jewish and Christian worldview, what is one's incentive for unifying in defense of something? There are no longer any values they believe in in common.

They know about the failure of the failed Trinity from the Quran.

Nobody knows squat "from the Koran." And if they read Torah, they'd be trinitarian. https://jewsforjesus.org/learn/the-trin ... scriptures

[MikeNovack]

They know about the failure of the failed Trinity from the Quran.

Nobody knows squat "from the Koran." And if they read Torah, they'd be trinitarian. https://jewsforjesus.org/learn/the-trin ... scriptures

Uh, there are a lot of Muslims on this planet and they believe they know from alQuran.

And no, Jews who know Torah (as well as those Jews not well versed in it) are NOT "trinitarians". Sorry, IC, your beliefs about the truth of God are NOT what Jews believe.

[Immanuel Can]

They know about the failure of the failed Trinity from the Quran.

Nobody knows squat "from the Koran." And if they read Torah, they'd be trinitarian. https://jewsforjesus.org/learn/the-trin ... scriptures

Uh, there are a lot of Muslims on this planet and they believe they know from alQuran.

Have you read it? I have.

They do indeed believe it. They shouldn't. Their imams have convinced them that it cannot be criticized. That's convenient, because it's pretty transparently bad. And since Mo relied on the Torah and Christianity for his own authority, it's pretty obviously wrong on every point upon which it contradicts those sources. It cannot even get basic details of Torah or the NT right. It's a thoroughly inept book, actually.

So read it. You'll see.

And no, Jews who know Torah (as well as those Jews not well versed in it) are NOT "trinitarians".

They should be. The evidence is there.

[FlashDangerpants]

Dude who believes a story about a wise king threatening to tear a baby in half to share it between two competing mothers, and then one of them says "yeah ok then" so that's how the wise king knows she isn't really the mum ... that guy tells us that some other book is silly.

[Will Bouwman]

And what does Europe have to counter them in terms of worldview?

This is a very serious problem. Having abandoned the metaphysical grounding of the Jewish and Christian worldview, what is one's incentive for unifying in defense of something? There are no longer any values they believe in in common.

Well, you can thank the Reformation and all those uppity antipapists for that. For an idea of how well we got along when we did have common values and beliefs, here is a list of the wars between 1000 - 1499: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_wars:_1000–1499

[Gary Childress]

And what does Europe have to counter them in terms of worldview?

This is a very serious problem. Having abandoned the metaphysical grounding of the Jewish and Christian worldview, what is one's incentive for unifying in defense of something? There are no longer any values they believe in in common.

Well, you can thank the Reformation and all those uppity antipapists for that. For an idea of how well we got along when we did have common values and beliefs, here is a list of the wars between 1000 - 1499: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_wars:_1000–1499

IC has been taught an "alternative" history of the Church. He believes that when the Church was at its best, there was greater peace and love in the world. Or if there wasn't, then it's all the fault of bad people for making the world not peaceful and loving. God gave us a chance at happiness, and being the unworthy sinners that we are, we squandered it and therefore have nothing or no one to blame but ourselves. Oddly enough, IC feels like this is not a cause for shame but a cause for becoming "better" and overcoming our sins to someday make it into Heaven and avoid Hell, which we otherwise deserve by default.

Christianity is a cheerful religion. When we all accept that we are unworthy "sinners" who have "fallen" from the truly good God, then true happiness can begin (although perhaps only happiness for IC, who can then look down on us from Heaven and tell us what unworthy sinners we are who deserve to be in Hell).

[Immanuel Can]

And what does Europe have to counter them in terms of worldview?

This is a very serious problem. Having abandoned the metaphysical grounding of the Jewish and Christian worldview, what is one's incentive for unifying in defense of something? There are no longer any values they believe in in common.

Well, you can thank the Reformation and all those uppity antipapists for that. For an idea of how well we got along when we did have common values and beliefs, here is a list of the wars between 1000 - 1499: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_wars:_1000–1499

Right. Well, you'll have to extract from that number all those caused by the RC's, because we already know they were doing that, and they're the institutional-political religion. And then you'll have to extract all those who did something their Scriptures commanded them not to do -- for then, it's not reasonable to think that it was their religious beliefs that led them to do what they did. One cannot blame a creed for those who refuse to obey it, of course. And the number left will be so vanishingly small you've got nothing to work with.

And it will always be dwarfed by the numbers of those who died in secular wars and purges...by orders of magnitude. By best estimates, not more than 4% of that total, and certainly less than that.

If, therefore, you're recommending secularism as an alternative, your statistical applications will need some revision.

[Gary Childress]

This is a very serious problem. Having abandoned the metaphysical grounding of the Jewish and Christian worldview, what is one's incentive for unifying in defense of something? There are no longer any values they believe in in common.

Well, you can thank the Reformation and all those uppity antipapists for that. For an idea of how well we got along when we did have common values and beliefs, here is a list of the wars between 1000 - 1499: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_wars:_1000–1499

Right. Well, you'll have to extract from that number all those caused by the RC's, because we already know they were doing that, and they're the institutional-political religion. And then you'll have to extract all those who did something their Scriptures commanded them not to do -- for then, it's not reasonable to think that it was their religious beliefs that led them to do what they did. One cannot blame a creed for those who refuse to obey it, of course. And the number left will be so vanishingly small you've got nothing to work with.

And it will always be dwarfed by the numbers of those who died in secular wars and purges...by orders of magnitude. By best estimates, not more than 4% of that total, and certainly less than that.

If, therefore, you're recommending secularism as an alternative, your statistical applications will need some revision.

Do all secular people desire war? Or does secularism necessarily lead to war? Or can it be said that only bad people who are secular desire war and that secularism doesn't necessarily lead to war?

[Immanuel Can]

Well, you can thank the Reformation and all those uppity antipapists for that. For an idea of how well we got along when we did have common values and beliefs, here is a list of the wars between 1000 - 1499: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_wars:_1000–1499

Right. Well, you'll have to extract from that number all those caused by the RC's, because we already know they were doing that, and they're the institutional-political religion. And then you'll have to extract all those who did something their Scriptures commanded them not to do -- for then, it's not reasonable to think that it was their religious beliefs that led them to do what they did. One cannot blame a creed for those who refuse to obey it, of course. And the number left will be so vanishingly small you've got nothing to work with.

And it will always be dwarfed by the numbers of those who died in secular wars and purges...by orders of magnitude. By best estimates, not more than 4% of that total, and certainly less than that.

If, therefore, you're recommending secularism as an alternative, your statistical applications will need some revision.

Do all secular people desire war? Or does secularism necessarily lead to war? Or can it be said that only bad people who are secular desire war and that secularism doesn't necessarily lead to war?

Well, let's not be silly. Of course it's never true that "all" of any people group "desire" exactly the same thing. But it wouldn't matter much what anybody "desires" if their beliefs still "lead" them "to war," as you also put it. Certain forms of secularism do not appear to lead to war; but other forms, like Socialism, seem to lead to it more than any other single force in history, and more than most combined, as well. That should concern us; for if some forms of secularism lead to homicidal, totalitarian kleptocracies, as Socialism has, in 100% of the cases we have, there comes a time when we ought to examine why that is happening...and to understand the reasons that ideology always leads to such misery, defeat and death. And nowadays, we know at least a great part of that.