• This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn more.

The Look of the Irish - Redifining the Irish person | Saffa Musleh | TEDxWexford

Joined
Mar 31, 2017
Messages
1,400
Likes
573
Points
113
Location
Dublin
I did read your previous. And you pointed out a fault in pro-life behaviour. i.e not being inclined to rescue the frozen embryo. That doesn't impact on the pro-life argument though which remains valid and independent of pro-life behaviour. People are imperfect and don't always live up to every dimension to the arguments they espouse. So you've landed a punch on pro-lifers. But not the pro-life argument.
No, I demolished the central tenet of the Catholic pro-life position. I've nothing against moderate pro-lifers who approach abortion from a more sensible paradigm.

And you do worship property. You are apparently OK with quacks running around on license lobbing off limbs of mentally distressed men who think they are women as long as the state doesn't pay for it!. You are also OK with mentally distressed men who think they are women being alone in toilets with young girls. All in the name of worshipping these property rights you think are literally sacrosanct. It's a profoundly disturbed worldview. As if configuring toilets appropriately is some undue tyranny, lol.
If the public dislike the policies of a particular business owner, they're free to go elsewhere. Generally speaking, a business owner is a much better judge of prudent policy than some bureaucrat. If any child was harmed , they'd be destroyed.

If the state decides it needs to intervene, then the burden of proof should be squarely on it. 'Tink of da childer' isn't a sufficient rationale. There needs to be an appreciable risk that can't be remedied by market forces alone.
Hysteria doesn't cut it.

I'll let HL Mencken drop a few words in:
The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed (and hence clamorous to be led to safety) by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins, all of them imaginary. H. L. Mencken
And these Anglosphere philosophers are lethal. You should stay away from them. Emotivism, lol.
Backed up by solid Neuroscience.


 
Last edited:
Joined
Mar 17, 2016
Messages
4,936
Likes
7,248
Points
263
Location
The land of the golden potato
No, I demolished the central tenet of the Catholic pro-life position. I've nothing against moderate pro-lifers who approach abortion from a more sensible paradigm.



If the public dislike the policies of a particular business owner, they're free to go elsewhere. Generally speaking, a business owner is a much better judge of prudent policy than some bureaucrat. If any child was harmed , they'd be destroyed.

If the state decides it needs to intervene. then the burden of proof should be squarely on it. 'Tink of da childer' isn't a sufficient rationale. There needs to be an appreciable risk that can't be remedied by market forces alone.
Hysteria doesn't cut it.

I'll let HL Mencken drop a few words in:




Backed up by solid Neuroscience.


"Demolished", lol. You haven't even approached the Catholic pro-life position.

But despite the numerous problems of the Catholic Church, I'd take the Catholic view that human life is sacred over the aspie view that men are machines any day of the week.

No, I'm not okay with little girls sharing a toilet with mentality ill men. You may think that's fine n' dandy in deference to that property-god of yours. It ain't cool with me and if government can't fathom that's not OK, then it's not doing it's job.



 
Joined
Mar 17, 2016
Messages
4,936
Likes
7,248
Points
263
Location
The land of the golden potato
Capitalism certainly spread Liberalism around the world, but I don't think Capitalism is possible without Liberalism having gained some intellectual ground first. I think it was a Liberal strain in the Church that allowed Capitalism to emerge. You need this Liberal idea of the atomized individual owner of private property for Capitalism to work. That goes completely against Feudalism. It's even against Roman republicanism or imperialism - and certainly against the Greek ideal. The connection of family and tribe were still of the utmost importance in those societies. In fact, a slave was described as a person cut off from their family and tribe, and thus powerless in the world, effectively dead. Of course, I am distinguishing between markets and Capitalism. Markets exist in other forms of society to Capitalism. In my view, that Liberal strain in the Catholic Church comes from Judaism, which does represent a private, unmediated, relationship between God and the individual. This was utterly alien to Roman or Greek religion, and surely was alien to Celtic or Germanic religions, in short to all Aryan religions. The Church was clearly well aware of this Liberal strain inside itself, and put up an heroic resistance to it for many centuries, perhaps culminating in the Spanish Inquisition - which was perfectly justified and necessary, if doomed to ultimate failure.
Liberalism has ancestry in Greece. It's basically man surrendering to his appetites and renouncing God to worship himself, often coopting the name of God in doing so. Thus we have the cult of individualism.

But the medieval Catholic Church is the polestar of anti-Capitalism until merchant speculators coopted the various monarchs and the Vatican politically compromised in its turn to stay politically relevant. . Before that Catholic society forbade cost cutting, it even forbade advertising. Usury was a grave sin. So if you want to go to a faith that is intrinsically anti-capitalist, traditional Catholicism is the way to go.

The key of event is the fall of Constantinople. I would argue that is an event as traumatic to the European mind as World War Two. It struck a huge blow to the confidence of Europe to be cut off from the Far East and to be menaced by the rising Islamic world. In step the speculators who subsequently bankrolled mercantile-liberalism, promising a return to grandeur and preeminence for the monarchs The result of all this is untold millions died in the "New World" and a phenomenon that is a distant ancestor liberal attempts to colonise the world today.

 

Tadhg Gaelach

Donator
Premium Account
Member
Joined
Jan 14, 2016
Messages
25,125
Likes
21,717
Points
313
Liberalism has ancestry in Greece. It's basically man surrendering to his appetites and renouncing God to worship himself, often coopting the name of God in doing so. Thus we have the cult of individualism.

But the medieval Catholic Church is the polestar of anti-Capitalism until merchant speculators coopted the various monarchs and the Vatican politically compromised in its turn to stay politically relevant. . Before that Catholic society forbade cost cutting, it even forbade advertising. Usury was a grave sin. So if you want to go to a faith that is intrinsically anti-capitalist, traditional Catholicism is the way to go.

The key of event is the fall of Constantinople. I would argue that is an event as traumatic to the European mind as World War Two. It struck a huge blow to the confidence of Europe to be cut off from the Far East and to be menaced by the rising Islamic world. In step the speculators who subsequently bankrolled mercantile-liberalism, promising a return to grandeur and preeminence for the monarchs The result of all this is untold millions died in the "New World" and a phenomenon that is a distant ancestor liberal attempts to colonise the world today.

Well, I'm agreeing with you and disagreeing. I certainly agree that the Catholic Church put up an heroic resistance to Liberalism. But I think the disease had infected Catholicism from the start, and was always waiting to become cancerous. You could well be right about the Fall of Constantinople as being the key moment. Without a doubt it was a trauma on a par with the World Wars. I really don't think Liberalism was found in ancient Greece though. Which Greek philosopher would you say showed signs of the Liberal disease? It certainly couldn't be Socrates - he rejects the offer to escape death on the grounds that the collective had condemned him. And certainly not Plato. And it most certainly couldn't be Heraclitus, who rejected the very core of Liberalism, i.e. the fixed self - cogito ergo sum. For Heraclitus, all was process - as in a river.
 
Joined
Mar 31, 2017
Messages
1,400
Likes
573
Points
113
Location
Dublin
"Demolished", lol. You haven't even approached the Catholic pro-life position.

But despite the numerous problems of the Catholic Church, I'd take the Catholic view that human life is sacred over the aspie view that men are machines any day of the week.

No, I'm not okay with little girls sharing a toilet with mentality ill men. You may think that's fine n' dandy in deference to that property-god of yours. It ain't cool with me and if government can't fathom that's not OK, then it's not doing it's job.


There isn't much to demolish. The RCC position is just reheated Aristotelianism with a few layers of flowery sophistry piled on top for good measure.

"Machines"??? there you go again with another strawman.

And as for "little girls sharing a toilet with mentally ill men" (yet another strawman) what evidence do you have of an urgent need for state meddling? You're a demagogues dream.
 
Joined
Mar 31, 2017
Messages
1,400
Likes
573
Points
113
Location
Dublin
Well, I'm agreeing with you and disagreeing. I certainly agree that the Catholic Church put up an heroic resistance to Liberalism. But I think the disease had infected Catholicism from the start, and was always waiting to become cancerous. You could well be right about the Fall of Constantinople as being the key moment. Without a doubt it was a trauma on a par with the World Wars. I really don't think Liberalism was found in ancient Greece though. Which Greek philosopher would you say showed signs of the Liberal disease? It certainly couldn't be Socrates - he rejects the offer to escape death on the grounds that the collective had condemned him. And certainly not Plato. And it most certainly couldn't be Heraclitus, who rejected the very core of Liberalism, i.e. the fixed self - cogito ergo sum. For Heraclitus, all was process - as in a river.
You love your bizarre sophistry, don't you?

But deep down Tadhg, you know you're a hapless spoofer. But even worse, you don't sound a millionth as profound as you think you do when you're bashing out that drivel on the keyboard. It's like Karl Marx rode Madam Blavatsky and the bastard offspring was dropped on its head at birth.

If you want to see how contrarian sophistry is done, I suggest you read "A confederacy of dunces".



Ignatius Reilly
“With the breakdown of the Medieval system, the gods of Chaos, Lunacy, and Bad Taste gained
ascendancy.” Ignatius was writing in one of his Big Chief tablets.
After a period in which the western world had enjoyed order, tranquility, unity, and oneness
with its True God and Trinity, there appeared winds of change which spelled evil days ahead. An
ill wind blows no one good. The luminous years of Abélard, Thomas à Becket, and Everyman
dimmed into dross; Fortuna’s wheel had turned on humanity, crushing its collarbone, smashing
its skull, twisting its torso, puncturing its pelvis, sorrowing its soul. Having once been so high,
humanity fell so low. What had once been dedicated to the soul was now dedicated to the sale.

“That is rather fine,” Ignatius said to himself and continued his hurried writing.
Merchants and charlatans gained control of Europe, calling their insidious gospel “The
Enlightenment.” The day of the locust was at hand, but from the ashes of humanity there arose
no Phoenix. The humble and pious peasant, Piers Plowman, went to town to sell his children to
the lords of the New Order for purposes that we may call questionable at best. (See Reilly,
Ignatius J., Blood on Their Hands: The Crime of It All, A study of some selected abuses in
sixteenth century Europe, a Monograph, 2 pages, 1950, Rare Book Room, Left Corridor, Third
Floor, Howard-Tilton Memorial Library, Tulane University, New Orleans 18, Louisiana. Note: I
mailed this singular monograph to the library as a gift; however, I am not really certain that it
was ever accepted. It may well have been thrown out because it was only written in pencil on
tablet paper.) The gyre had widened; The Great Chain of Being had snapped like so many paper
clips strung together by some drooling idiot; death, destruction, anarchy, progress, ambition,
and self-improvement were to be Piers’ new fate. And a vicious fate it was to be: now he was
faced with the perversion of having to GO TO WORK.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Mar 17, 2016
Messages
4,936
Likes
7,248
Points
263
Location
The land of the golden potato
There isn't much to demolish. The RCC position is just reheated Aristotelianism with a few layers of flowery sophistry piled on top for good measure.

"Machines"??? there you go again with another strawman.

And as for "little girls sharing a toilet with mentally ill men" (yet another strawman) what evidence do you have of an urgent need for state meddling? You're a demagogues dream.
A few jibes from you isn't a "demolition", lol. The RCC position is that human life is sacred and should be defended if a window exists to do so. It ain't nuthin' else.

Mainstream science mostly confines itself to the realm of matter and if only matter is true and everything is just a set of mechanical processes then we're all nothing but glorified machines. Yelling the word "strawman" doesn't let you squiggle of out that little cul de sac.

If you require "evidence", that little girls sharing a toilet with mentally ill men is problematic, then I just don't know what more I can do for you, dude. I know this makes your head explode but issuing a few modest planning regulations on this matter is something that should not distress sensible people. "a demagogues dream", lol. And he gives out to me about strawmen?
 
Joined
Mar 17, 2016
Messages
4,936
Likes
7,248
Points
263
Location
The land of the golden potato
Well, I'm agreeing with you and disagreeing. I certainly agree that the Catholic Church put up an heroic resistance to Liberalism. But I think the disease had infected Catholicism from the start, and was always waiting to become cancerous. You could well be right about the Fall of Constantinople as being the key moment. Without a doubt it was a trauma on a par with the World Wars. I really don't think Liberalism was found in ancient Greece though. Which Greek philosopher would you say showed signs of the Liberal disease? It certainly couldn't be Socrates - he rejects the offer to escape death on the grounds that the collective had condemned him. And certainly not Plato. And it most certainly couldn't be Heraclitus, who rejected the very core of Liberalism, i.e. the fixed self - cogito ergo sum. For Heraclitus, all was process - as in a river.
The DNA of liberalism begins with Epicureanism. Medieval Catholicism was socially structured to oppose it, until the Fall of Constantinople fundamentally unbalanced Christendom.
 

Tadhg Gaelach

Donator
Premium Account
Member
Joined
Jan 14, 2016
Messages
25,125
Likes
21,717
Points
313
The DNA of liberalism begins with Epicureanism. Medieval Catholicism was socially structured to oppose it, until the Fall of Constantinople fundamentally unbalanced Christendom.

You may well be right about that a chara. It's certainly plausible. My only objection would be that what we know of the thinking of Epicurus seems to be very similar to the teachings of the Buddha. And yet, Liberalism certainly didn't evolve inside Buddhism. They both take a very impersonal view of God, and don't promote any kind of individual relation with God. As I said above, I still suspect this individual, even private, relation with God as the root of Liberalism. For example, if we compare the message of the Gods to Agamemnon to sacrifice his daughter Iphigenia so that the Greeks will have victory over the Trojans, with the instruction of God to Abraham to kill his son. Agamemnon is given a communal reason for the act, and if he doesn't do it, he has to tell his fellow Greeks why they cannot have victory over the Trojans. Abraham can't even tell his wife. No reason whatsoever is given. This is a private act which is part of a private relationship between Abraham and God. I think such private relations are the origin of Liberalism. God later gets reduced to the ego. I would say the ISIS terrorists who have similar private instructions in their heads are also true Liberals. As are terrorist bombers like Bush, Blair, Obama and now Trump.
 

Ire-land

Donator
Premium Account
Member
Joined
Feb 22, 2017
Messages
3,389
Likes
4,556
Points
263
Location
Dublin

Tadhg Gaelach

Donator
Premium Account
Member
Joined
Jan 14, 2016
Messages
25,125
Likes
21,717
Points
313
China man born in China is offended when Irish people ask where he's from.

I remember one time I was in London in a Chinese restaurant, and most of the tables were communal, i.e. you just got a place at a very big table. A young couple asked if they could have a table for two, and the waiter just said - No, go to McDonalds! I must say I admire that trait in the Chinese. This fellow must have forgotten what his own people are like. I can well believe that. Maybe the Libtardism is in the water in Western Europe.
 
Joined
Mar 31, 2017
Messages
1,400
Likes
573
Points
113
Location
Dublin
The DNA of liberalism begins with Epicureanism. Medieval Catholicism was socially structured to oppose it, until the Fall of Constantinople fundamentally unbalanced Christendom.
The nature of things by Lucretius is a masterpiece.
As for Christianity, it decimated the philosophical diversity of Rome.

I think Nietzsche put it best in the gay science

The greatest advantage of polytheism — For an individual to posit his own ideal and to
derive from it his own law, joys, and rights—that may well have been considered hitherto as the
most outrageous human aberration and as idolatry itself. ... The wonderful art and gift of creating
gods—polytheism—was the medium through which this impulse could discharge, purify,
perfect, and ennoble itself ... There was only one norm, man
; and every people thought that it
possessed this one ultimate norm. But above and outside, in some distant overworld, one was
permitted to behold a plurality of norms; one god was not considered a denial of another god, nor
blasphemy against him. ... The invention of gods, heroes, and overmen of all kinds, as well as
near-men and undermen, dwarfs, fairies, centaurs, satyrs, demons, and devils was the inestimable
preliminary exercise for the justification of the egoism and sovereignty of the individual ...

Monotheism, on the other hand, this rigid consequence of the doctrine of one normal
human type—the faith in one normal god beside whom there are only pseudo-gods—was
perhaps the greatest danger that has yet confronted humanity. ... In polytheism the free-spiriting
and many-spiriting of man attained its first preliminary form—the strength to create for
ourselves our own new eyes—and ever again new eyes that are even more our own: hence man
alone among all animals has no eternal horizons and perspectives
.​