Monty, are you trying to say that you don't agree with my opinion on the article?
I agree with it in the sense that it probably isn't wrong but I think it ignores the root of the problem as do most "academic" attempts to analyse the issue.
Essentially we should be spending our time and money on fencing off the cliff rather than building a hospital at the bottom to reduce ambulance costs.
You know after reading that, then reading it again and once more because I got confused I have decided that we are doing everything we can to avoid solving the problem by looking for overly complex reasons as to why people turn to terrorism.
As a kid I grew up in a traditional family of the time, dad worked, mum stayed at home, we were packed up and sent to school, on the weekends we as a family went and did things.
Since then we trade seven days a week, jobs are now almost entirely rostered and the pay has failed to keep up resulting in both parents having to work at all hours and sometimes requiring multiple jobs, what time you do get is spent frantically trying to fill in the gaps, most kids probably couldn't pick their parents from a line up (and in many cases one has totally abandoned the process and fled the scene).
I guess my point is that perhaps we should look at the world we have created/inherited to find the root causes and solutions.
Anyway sorry for the rambling but reflection is a big thing in New Zealand right now and I am probably doing a bit of it myself.
All I can say to this is to quote Mahatma Gandhi — 'Earth provides enough to satisfy every man's needs, but not every man's greed.'
Again, let me emphasize once again the root causes, which are inequality, poverty, and social injustices.
No, we should get the facts straight. The world's richest 1% own the world's 45% of wealth. Isn't that global inequality?
By and large, it is the flawed capitalism to be blamed.
That is why Karl Marx reminded us that "The philosophers have only interpreted the world, in various ways; the point is to change it."
- Marx, Theses On Feuerbach: Thesis 11 (1845)
However, I disagree with using Marx theories as a soluton. He didn't understand the human nature's and that's why everybody following his thoughts end up with misery. There will always be a ruling elite, you can't change that, but Marx thought he could, but it ended up with something really bad.
Can you give me an example of someone who followed Marx and then they ended up in misery? Or, are you just saying this because you don't like Marx's Communist Manifesto? The truth is Marx was communism’s most zealous intellectual advocate. His comprehensive writings on the subject laid the foundation for later political leaders, notably V. I. Lenin and Mao Tse-tung, to impose communism on more than twenty countries. Although, the idea of communism was undermined by capitalism, it isn't dead yet. Remember, change is the law of the universe!
What about every country trying his theory. It hasn't been any communistic country in the world and it will never be any. Do you know why? For a country to reach communism, it needs to go through three steps. the avant guards leading the revolution, they implement the proletarian dictatorship, and then you get communism. Countries trying it get stuck in the second step. Why do they do that? Those in power will not give it away. Marx didn't understand the human nature and that is the major flaw with his theory. So every attempt of using his political and economical theories have failed.
While I tend to agree with the point that you are trying to make, I also think that Marx believed that capitalism contained the seeds of its own destruction. He described how the wealth of the bourgeoisie depended on the work of the proletariat. Therefore, capitalism requires an underclass. But Marx predicted that the continued exploitation of this underclass would create great resentment. Time will tell....
That is not correct : liberalism is an ideology; economy is neutral .
Quite amusing, but you are both right and wrong. The two concepts can never be separated. I know this can be confusing when capitalism is an economic system, but not a political system. Let me elaborate further on what separate and what unites them. First of all, when an ism is an ideology. It's an idea of how to organize the society, so economy is a vital part of it. So you when are saying economy is neutral, that is extremely wrong. There is a huge difference between a liberal market economy and a socialistic economy. Do I need to explain the difference between the two....really? If you don't get the difference, you need to visit a library. That is a place with a lot of books, I presume you have those in Belgium
This is not correct : a capitalist economy can exist in a democracy (US) or a dictatorship (Franquist Spain ),while a communist economy can only exist in a dictatorship .
Thus a liberal market economy does not exist .Because liberalism is not democracy.Liberalism is a 19th century totalitarian ideology .A bastard brother of socialism .
Saying that there is a liberal market economy means that there is in some countries also a conservative market economy.:roll:
If there is liberal capitalism, there is also conservative capitalism.:roll:
If there is a liberal democracy there must exist somewhere a conservative democracy .:roll:
Liberalism implies the existence of conservatism .
Coming from a liberal, that is a good one .You are entitled to your opinions, but science beats opinions every time. Do it again and do it correctly.
Coming from a liberal, that is a good one .
Science never beats opinions .
Science is the idol of liberalism and socialism who both are totalitarian, amoral and materialistic ideologies. SCience has made possible Auschwitz .
They want to build a materialistic heaven on earth and have succeeded to build a hell on earth .
Hannah Arend has proved that both liberalism and socialism are responsible for evil on earth .
In every liberal there is a totalitarian screaming to get out : people as the mayor of New York who dictates what people can eat, people as Robert Kennedy Jr who wants to put in jail all those who do not believe in Global Warming, people as Richard Parncutt who demands that they must be killed . Or those in Britain who wanted, and succeeded ,the death of a sick baby : eugenics are invented and practiced by liberals, already before Hitler .
It is not surprising that the Liberals have enthusiastically embraced Muslim terrorism .