Patting the wrists, rolling the eyes.

[sgtclub]

Thoughts anyone?

I'm not sure why, but for some reason this makes me happy.

[Mmmm, Burger (C.J.)]

Originally posted by sgtclub
Thoughts anyone?

I'm not sure why, but for some reason this makes me happy.

I think I should buy stock in Boeing.

It's not a big-picture surprise. I wasn't following the polling, but it has for years seemed incomprehensible to me that Europe, with all its separate histories, would be able to form a true union that goes beyond the merely economic. It's not like the US, which was able to form by the happenstance of growing out of the colonization by a single country, with a lot of common beliefs and fundamentally a shared history and culture.

Can you imagine trying to form the US today, though? Even if it weren't state by state, but say by region? I don't think it would happen. Instead it would be a loose confederation of economic territories sharing certain common interests. E.g., new england, mid atlantic, south, midwest, farm belt, rockies, california (actually, probably 2-3 separate states there), northwest. who knows exactly how it would work, but I don't think it could combine as it is.

[sgtclub]

Originally posted by Mmmm, Burger (C.J.)
I think I should buy stock in Boeing.

It's not a big-picture surprise. I wasn't following the polling, but it has for years seemed incomprehensible to me that Europe, with all its separate histories, would be able to form a true union that goes beyond the merely economic. It's not like the US, which was able to form by the happenstance of growing out of the colonization by a single country, with a lot of common beliefs and fundamentally a shared history and culture.

Can you imagine trying to form the US today, though? Even if it weren't state by state, but say by region? I don't think it would happen. Instead it would be a loose confederation of economic territories sharing certain common interests. E.g., new england, mid atlantic, south, midwest, farm belt, rockies, california (actually, probably 2-3 separate states there), northwest. who knows exactly how it would work, but I don't think it could combine as it is.

I had similar thoughts. Question is, where do they go from here? This seems to cement the survival of the pound.

[Sidd Finch]

Originally posted by sgtclub
Thoughts anyone?

I'm not sure why, but for some reason this makes me happy.

I think the idea of Europe ran away with itself, especially with the end of the Cold War and with the push for a form of diversity. The former resulted in Eastern Bloc countries pushing to join what had been a club of mostly wealthy countries -- bringing very different histories, economic needs, and political perspectives. The latter led to Turkey pushing to join, a development that France in particular opposes because of the enormous cultural, demographic, and economic issues that would pose.*

Ultimately I think Europe will be stronger if it keeps its focus on maintaining and promoting an economic union, one that in particular maximizes trade opportunities for the former Eastern Bloc countries.


*Which is interesting, because if you read this board you would think that France is dominated by radical Muslim clerics.

[Mmmm, Burger (C.J.)]

Originally posted by sgtclub
I had similar thoughts. Question is, where do they go from here? This seems to cement the survival of the pound.

I don't see why they have to go anywhere other than the same place. Is it necessary to have the constitution? It seems that the countries are ready for economic unification, but not necessarily social policy integration. Seems like a reasonable balance--perhaps not the best one, but who am I to say what's best for Europe or France?

[chickmagnet]

Originally posted by sgtclub
Thoughts anyone?

I'm not sure why, but for some reason this makes me happy.

Hi! I finally found you guys. How come you left me on infirm with all the wackjobs?

Anyway, to answer your question, your happy because it fuels your anti-European, anti-human rights sense of imperialism. But don't count your chickens before they are hatched, cuz this is the latest nail in the coffin of a westernized judeo-christian Europe and a further move towards the ultimate reclamation of the continent by the Muslims. Which is your worst nightmare.

[chickmagnet]

Originally posted by Mmmm, Burger (C.J.)
Instead it would be a loose confederation of economic territories sharing certain common interests. E.g., new england, mid atlantic, south, midwest, farm belt, rockies, california (actually, probably 2-3 separate states there), northwest. who knows exactly how it would work, but I don't think it could combine as it is.

This is the future Burgerboy, get ready for it.

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally posted by Spanky
You can't define evil by saying that it is something that is not good. Or visa versa. You need to define one of them. Good, evil or moral.

Over the weekend I read a book called "The End of Faith: Religion, Terror, and the Futre of Reason". By Sam Harris. I had read summaries of it before, seen interviews of the author but I actually careflly read it this weekend. The thesis of the book is that all Faith is bad, and unless we learn to question people's faith (with the advent of Weapons of Mass Destruction) we are all doomed. The author had clearly come across people with my world view before, so he addressed each one of the things I have proposed on the board and critisized it (rather well). There is a whole section were he argues that ethics and morals do not need to come from either faith or from selfishness. It is almost like entire sections of the book were written just to call B.S. on what I have been saying on this board. The author did a very good job of explaining what I was trying to say on this board, before he attacks it. If people want to read this book, and then start a new thread discussing it, I am totally open to that. I think it would be a perfect starting point for a discussion on morality. However, I think it is time to let this discussion end. I realize main cause of it getting out of hand and utterly tedious was me, but even I have realized that it has become pretty absurd.

I have picked that book up intending to buy it at least ten times. I haven't though, and its because even I can't handle a vision as bleak as Harris'. I don't think I'm going anywhere when I die, and I don't buy any religion. But I can't imagine a world in which everybody just shrugged and said "Yep, this is it. This is all you'll ever know." We'd have a lot of fucked up people around doing some incredibly fucked up things. I think faith is an informed decision to reject the pointlessness of it all. Some folks can't deal with the fact that its all random and inconsequential. Even if I don't agree, I have to admit, their belief is sort of encouraging. They're something sort of laudable about a person really earnestly wanting to be more than he is, and actually beleiving he is more than he is. So I guess I won't pick on the faithful so much anymore. I get it, even if I don't buy it. Like Lennon said, "Whatever gets [them] through the night, its allright..."

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally posted by sebastian_dangerfield
They're something sort of laudable about a person really earnestly wanting to be more than he is, and actually beleiving he is more than he is.

But there can be downsides. Like somehting convinced GGG that over 3300 of his thoughts were valuable enough to share.

[Sidd Finch]

Originally posted by sebastian_dangerfield
even I can't handle a vision as bleak as Harris'.

If Sebby says that, it must be a pretty bleak vision indeed.

[taxwonk]

Originally posted by Hank Chinaski
when them mugs in Iraq chop off heads, they are being moral because they're doing good?

Nope. They're doing evil. No 72 virgins for them.

[Spanky]

Originally posted by Sidd Finch
I think the idea of Europe ran away with itself, especially with the end of the Cold War and with the push for a form of diversity. The former resulted in Eastern Bloc countries pushing to join what had been a club of mostly wealthy countries -- bringing very different histories, economic needs, and political perspectives. The latter led to Turkey pushing to join, a development that France in particular opposes because of the enormous cultural, demographic, and economic issues that would pose.*

Ultimately I think Europe will be stronger if it keeps its focus on maintaining and promoting an economic union, one that in particular maximizes trade opportunities for the former Eastern Bloc countries.

*Which is interesting, because if you read this board you would think that France is dominated by radical Muslim clerics.

I believe this is just a speed bump on the road to European unity. The polling showed that most of the French are for a Constitution, but it just needs to be rewritten. I think they are worried by two things. 1) The union forcing a neo-liberal (as they like to say "Anglo") economic system. Which will make them too much like the United States (God forbid) and flood their country with cheap labour destroying their social safety net. 2) Turkey - since most French envision a much tighter union that goes beyond just Economics they don't want Turkey in. The British, who see a loose European confederation, don't mind Turkey so much.

Europe needs to unify it is even going to have half a chance to keep up with the US in the near future, and China and India in the far flung future. At a certain point Economic unity also requires social integration (especially for socialist leaning nations).

[Spanky]

Originally posted by sebastian_dangerfield
I have picked that book up intending to buy it at least ten times. I haven't though, and its because even I can't handle a vision as bleak as Harris'. I don't think I'm going anywhere when I die, and I don't buy any religion. But I can't imagine a world in which everybody just shrugged and said "Yep, this is it. This is all you'll ever know." We'd have a lot of fucked up people around doing some incredibly fucked up things. I think faith is an informed decision to reject the pointlessness of it all. Some folks can't deal with the fact that its all random and inconsequential. Even if I don't agree, I have to admit, their belief is sort of encouraging. They're something sort of laudable about a person really earnestly wanting to be more than he is, and actually beleiving he is more than he is. So I guess I won't pick on the faithful so much anymore. I get it, even if I don't buy it. Like Lennon said, "Whatever gets [them] through the night, its allright..."

Actually, he argues that without faith, morality and ethics (and more moral world) has a better future. It is not all that bleak. Although I don't agree with everything he says, he does a really good job of sumarizing the current trends in philisophical thought.

[sgtclub]

Originally posted by Mmmm, Burger (C.J.)
I don't see why they have to go anywhere other than the same place. Is it necessary to have the constitution? It seems that the countries are ready for economic unification, but not necessarily social policy integration. Seems like a reasonable balance--perhaps not the best one, but who am I to say what's best for Europe or France?

It's not necessary to have a constitution, but I think it facilitates some of the stated goals (which I think are pipe dreams), including providing collective armed forces to rival those of the US.

[sgtclub]

Originally posted by chickmagnet
Hi! I finally found you guys. How come you left me on infirm with all the wackjobs?

Anyway, to answer your question, your happy because it fuels your anti-European, anti-human rights sense of imperialism. But don't count your chickens before they are hatched, cuz this is the latest nail in the coffin of a westernized judeo-christian Europe and a further move towards the ultimate reclamation of the continent by the Muslims. Which is your worst nightmare.

Nice try troll boy