[!@#$%!]

Originally Posted by Everyneurotic

the only way democracy could be a little more legitimate is for it to legalize and count abstinence, since that's a part of the population that disagrees with all candidates. when only votes are counted it's just a fraction of the people that's counted, meaning just a few decide for all and that's unfair. that's a way of making the actual form a bit better.

but of course, democracy is very flawed and a new form of government should be started, but that's a way to make democracy a bit more fair.

i null my vote so that no one else can use that ballot for their convenience and so that (at least in theory) they can see that i'm not for any of the choices (of course this is wishful thinking).

again, there should be something new but, as i posted earlier, the people in power can manipulate democracy so well for themselves that they won't give any other form to be even considerated. that's the sad truth and the reason there have not been any other government form proposals in decades (or even centuries now).

new forms of government will enter the picture once democracy fails the people who benefit from it.

you remind me of that woody allen character who said he hated reality, but it was the only place where he could get a good steak. now i don't know what your steak is, but i'm sure you want something out of life, don't you?

i think you are suffering from delusions brought on by idealism. you want a perfect world. there is no such thing. those who learn to deal with the world as it is are neither conformists nor sellouts-- they are just people who have learned that reality and ideals are universes apart, and that's the truth about the world.

in a way, the idealist, taking refuge in the cocoon of his dreams, is the true pussy, unable to face reality for what it is. now, i'm not saying let's give up on ideals-- ideals are great. but no matter how hard you try to implement them they are going to have flaws and failures, because that is the nature of the universe-- it does not correspond to our dreams of crystallized perfection.

you see, im a materialist, i believe that matter comes first and ideas are born of matter, and energy, inside our brains; so i don't think that ideals have any real existence outside our brains. metaphysics is nothing but a collection of our dreams. ideals are abstractions-- guides at most, but they never have had an exact correlate in the world. find me a perfect circle in the non-mental world and i will give up on my argument.

when you throw your hands up in the air in disillusion and do nothing about reality simply because it does not conform to your ideals, you are missing the chance to do something about that reality. reality can be improved if we work at it, and we should all work at improving it, but shirking that work with the excuse that there will always be imperfections is the actual reason why we are the way we are. it's easy to sit aside and throw rocks at what other people do, it's much harder to actually try to do something and fail and try again and maybe get a couple of things right before you die.

[MellySingsDoom]

Interesting points here, for sure. To get back to the specific topic in hand, does anyone here agree with this boycott stance, and if so, why?

[!@#$%!]

Originally Posted by MellySingsDoom

Interesting points here, for sure. To get back to the specific topic in hand, does anyone here agree with this boycott stance, and if so, why?

i think it's wrong in principle, but i don't know the specifics. perhaps they are only boycotting areas of military research, but somehow i suspect that those doing that work do not much care for boycotts. maybe the intention is to goad israeli intelectuals into action, but from what i can tell, israeli intellectuals are already invoved in all sorts of political activism. so i don't know who this punishes and who it rewards.

if they said "we're going to boycott their bus drivers because they vote for likud", i'd understand better. but i really have no clue who these people are, what they want, nor how they mean to achieve it.

what i'm most concerned about is the ineffectiveness of the labor party. it seems that, like with begin, only the right wing is capable of making peace when it becomes practical. people were willing to get behind rabin because he was hawkish, and the porker sharon was after all the one who evacuated gaza... but if netanyahu gets to power, jeezus, that man is a weasel and a demagogue fuck.

[MellySingsDoom]

^^^^ - By effectively tarring all Israeli academics with the same brush, regardless of their political and moral views, this boycott treats them as one lumpen mass. It's ridiculous to suggest (as this boycott does) that, because lecturers are employed by the state, they must agree with the state. By that reasoning, all UK lecturers must agree with the UK government's position in Iraq.

I can't help but suspect a least a tinge of anti-Semitism too - the boycott giving a message of "We won't deal with Jews, no matter who they are". Now I'm sure people will disagree on this specific point - this is simply my subjective view.

Finally, shouldn't the union be doing things like, you know, representing it's members interests in the UK, instead of pissing around with motions that make self-righteous smug gits feel so much better about themselves?

[!@#$%!]

Originally Posted by MellySingsDoom

^^^^ - By effecting tarring all Israeli academics with the same brush, regardless of their political and moral views, this boycott treats them as one lumpen mass. It's ridiculous to suggest (as this boycott does) that, because lecturers are employed by the state, they must agree with the state. By that reasoning, all UK lecturers must agree with the UK government's position in Iraq.

I can't help but suspect a least a tinge of anti-Semitism too - the boycott giving a message of "We won't deal with Jews, no matter who they are". Now I'm sure people will disagree on this specific point - this is simply my subjective view.

Finally, shouldn't the union be doing things like, you know, representing it's members interests in the UK, instead of pissing around with motions that make self-righteous smug gits feel so much better about themselves?

if it's like you say, yes, it's really a stupid move on the part of this union. about antisemitism i don't know, but arabs are semitic people as well-- just to clarify--. so you mean jew haters? strange people like that still exist. and it only fuels the siege mentality of israel, i'm afraid.

now about the activitis of unions, yes-- i once dropped out of a budding union because some brilliant idealist had the genius to use the union as a platform to start condemning u.s. foreign policy in iraq (before the war) as well as other fuzzy uncertain causes nobody could agree on, rather than focusing on issues of employment, fair wages, etc.

some people however see this as a "universal struggle for justice" and go on to pursue all kinds of causes because they feel to be on the right in every case. my feeling is that this undermines the original cause they are supposed to embrace.

but then again there is this standing criticism that since the fall of communism (sue me porky for using this term that's how it's known, "communism") or maybe even since earlier, the western left has splintered into a myriad of issue groups and it lacks any great overarching ideology, which weakens it... then again maybe this is an offshoot of postmodernism & lack of faith in big narratives... but yeah there are always people who prefer to fight large unwinnable fuzzy battles rather than pick away at small tactical winnable fronts. a matter of strategy i suppose. in this case it seems to me the strategy is flawed.

[tesla69]

Hey Moshe, is this true:
"...all Israeli's get free health care for life..."????

[!@#$%!]

Originally Posted by tesla69

Hey Moshe, is this true:
"...all Israeli's get free health care for life..."????

i dont claim to speak for moshe but 10 years ago this was totally true, i don't see how it would change. it's a little bit bureaucratic, but your ass is taken care of.

[Moshe]

we do have a mandatory health insurance but everyone must pay for it a fixed percentage of their income.

[Everyneurotic]

Originally Posted by !@#$%!

you remind me of that woody allen character who said he hated reality, but it was the only place where he could get a good steak. now i don't know what your steak is, but i'm sure you want something out of life, don't you?

i think you are suffering from delusions brought on by idealism. you want a perfect world. there is no such thing. those who learn to deal with the world as it is are neither conformists nor sellouts-- they are just people who have learned that reality and ideals are universes apart, and that's the truth about the world.

in a way, the idealist, taking refuge in the cocoon of his dreams, is the true pussy, unable to face reality for what it is. now, i'm not saying let's give up on ideals-- ideals are great. but no matter how hard you try to implement them they are going to have flaws and failures, because that is the nature of the universe-- it does not correspond to our dreams of crystallized perfection.

you see, im a materialist, i believe that matter comes first and ideas are born of matter, and energy, inside our brains; so i don't think that ideals have any real existence outside our brains. metaphysics is nothing but a collection of our dreams. ideals are abstractions-- guides at most, but they never have had an exact correlate in the world. find me a perfect circle in the non-mental world and i will give up on my argument.

when you throw your hands up in the air in disillusion and do nothing about reality simply because it does not conform to your ideals, you are missing the chance to do something about that reality. reality can be improved if we work at it, and we should all work at improving it, but shirking that work with the excuse that there will always be imperfections is the actual reason why we are the way we are. it's easy to sit aside and throw rocks at what other people do, it's much harder to actually try to do something and fail and try again and maybe get a couple of things right before you die.

you just clicked on "quote & reply" and read it over your head didn't you?

i NEVER said i was for communism and against money, ambition and possessions.

i also stated several times that it's WISHFUL THINKING what i'm posting.

you asked me what was i doing about it (about democracy and new ways of government) i answered you bluntly, that's what i do, rather than resort to a "close enough mentality"

i'm by NO means an activist and i do enjoy life a lot, actually, i can't complain much, but things are not right in this world, maybe they'll never be but, if we just stand there and say "ohh we're screwed" then we would have been extinted a long time ago.

i'm also not an existentialist who thinks life is death interrupted or whatever.

but one thing i can say that i can't stand is mediocrity, thinking things are "close enough" or "almost good", i hate it, i live around it every day of my life and can't fathom people actually living like that, if i'm not doing the best that i can, then why bother? i would rather kill myself. and that goes for my life and the life of those i care about, if they don't have the best life they can, then what do you have to live for? there's always an option, just as there's always something in this universe to be discovered and as there's always something to be said.

i live my life and actually do what i want of it and i'm not afraid to go for it.

if being a conformist is your boat, go on and have a good one, i actually would like to see things better and for that you have to have a good grasp at reality, rather than sit back and get bored by the passing second.

[demonrail666]

Originally Posted by !@#$%!

if it's like you say, yes, it's really a stupid move on the part of this union. about antisemitism i don't know

There definitely is a nagging anti-semitism amongst the UKs liberal-left chattering classes.

[!@#$%!]

Originally Posted by Everyneurotic

you just clicked on "quote & reply" and read it over your head didn't you?

but of course not, you are not taking me for a retard, are you? because that's not going to fly. evidently i read your post and answered, but if you are not happy with my answer i'm sorry.

Originally Posted by Everyneurotic

i NEVER said i was for communism and against money, ambition and possessions.

i never said you were. where did i say that?

Originally Posted by Everyneurotic

i also stated several times that it's WISHFUL THINKING what i'm posting.

that's my point, you seem to be stuck in the wishful part. you complain about the imperfection of democracy, you blank your vote, and you decry the evils of the system-- yet you do nothing to change or improve the system and you don't propose one either, hoping that some social scientist is going to conjure some sort of magical solution.

i'm just pointing out that i consider this attitude misguided and wrong. and i pointed out what i saw as the epistemological roots of your error-- not moral roots, mind you, i am not issuing a moral condemnation, or if i did, that was not the primary objective. my objective was to point out what i see as an error in your understanding of the world, i.e., hoping for impossible and unformulated ideals while withdrawing from the dirty work of reality. im talking here about political choices, nothing else.

Originally Posted by Everyneurotic

you asked me what was i doing about it (about democracy and new ways of government) i answered you bluntly, that's what i do, rather than resort to a "close enough mentality"

you answered that you vote blank as to express your discontent. how is that better than a "close enough" mentality i don't know. it's actually worse.

Originally Posted by Everyneurotic

i'm by NO means an activist and i do enjoy life a lot, actually, i can't complain much, but things are not right in this world, maybe they'll never be but, if we just stand there and say "ohh we're screwed" then we would have been extinted a long time ago.

right, but you have said that you just do nothing constructive. at least when it come to politics i mean. you said you just express your discontent. "i support nothing because nothing is good enough". how is that better than supporting, say, the least harmful choice, or participating in the creation of an alternative? please explain.

Originally Posted by Everyneurotic

i'm also not an existentialist who thinks life is death interrupted or whatever.

neither am i, i don't get the point of your allusion. did any of us say that?

Originally Posted by Everyneurotic

but one thing i can say that i can't stand is mediocrity, thinking things are "close enough" or "almost good", i hate it, i live around it every day of my life and can't fathom people actually living like that, if i'm not doing the best that i can, then why bother? i would rather kill myself. and that goes for my life and the life of those i care about, if they don't have the best life they can, then what do you have to live for? there's always an option, just as there's always something in this universe to be discovered and as there's always something to be said.

yeah i can't stand mediocrity either, but that doesn't mean giving up on things though. how does your blank vote prevent or combat mediocrity? how does your blank vote promote a better democracy, or an alternative to it? it's like you have 1/2 of the problem figured out but then don't know what to do.

Originally Posted by Everyneurotic

i live my life and actually do what i want of it and i'm not afraid to go for it.

yes yes, forgive my generalization, i meant this discussion to be about your political involvement or lack of it.

the reason i argued with you is that you seem to think that democracies are evil and corrupt and beyond repair. but having experienced dictatorships and their consequences, i can tell you again (because i said this before) that democracies, while not perfect, and 100 times better than tyrannies. and this is a significant thing. because we have to live SOMEWHERE and democracies are worth fighting for. and if you have a democracy and are doing nothing to maintain it or improve it, it's like you're shitting in your own drinking water, and you don't know or can't value the treasure you have.

now, i have to say, mexican democracy is not exactly a democracy, so i can understand your disappointment and paralysis, but you made generalizations about a system of government in a thread about international politics... so while i could agree with "mexican democracy is a sham", i cannot agree with your condemnation of democracy in general. no way.

Originally Posted by Everyneurotic

if being a conformist is your boat, go on and have a good one, i actually would like to see things better and for that you have to have a good grasp at reality, rather than sit back and get bored by the passing second.

no sir, no, in the case of politics you are more of a conformist than i am, because you express your discontent but do nothing about it, hence allowing the status quo to remain untouched. i am not a conformist, i DO things to improve, i don't just mutely register my discontent and wish idly for something better; i do put words, money and effort behind the things i support--conformists don't do that.

[!@#$%!]

Originally Posted by demonrail666

There definitely is a nagging anti-semitism amongst the UKs liberal-left chattering classes.

that's terrible.

[fugazifan]

i think this article sums up my feeling on the matter...
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/pages/S...?itemNo=865499

[!@#$%!]

Originally Posted by fugazifan

i think this article sums up my feeling on the matter...
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/pages/S...?itemNo=865499

strange, and i don't mean to boast, but that's pretty much what i've been saying since the start of this thread, of course without such clarity and knowledge of the facts, but yes, i couldn't agree more with it, and now i'm fully convinced, the british lecturers fucked up big time.

[fugazifan]

i stated from the beggining of the thread that you are completely right
and he uses such a great title for his article...
haaretz is known in israel as the intelectual left wing paper. rightists have even been known to call it an "arab paper," and he always writes brilliant editorials on everybody. so if he thinks that its moral masturbation, it must really be true...

[demonrail666]

I agree with everything in that article but, as a UK lecturer myself, I have to say that absolutely no mention of any such boycott seems to be taking place within universities themselves. I'm guessing/hoping that it's just a crackpot spokesperson for the Student Union getting their fifteen minutes of fame. It happens a lot.

[Bastian]

If Mahmoud has his way, there ain't much left to boycott:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/worldlates...680464,00.html

Ahmadinejad: Israel Will Be Destroyed

TEHRAN, Iran (AP)- Iran's hard-line President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad on Sunday said the world would witness the destruction of Israel soon, the official Islamic Republic News Agency reported.

[!@#$%!]

Originally Posted by Bastian

If Mahmoud has his way, there ain't much left to boycott:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/worldlates...680464,00.html

jeezus johnson, that moron is a disgrace. fuck the ayatollahs. what a bunch of yahoos.

soon, we'll have the same in the u.s.-- christian ayatollahs. with nukes. what a fucking disaster.

[Everyneurotic]

Originally Posted by !@#$%!

but of course not, you are not taking me for a retard, are you? because that's not going to fly. evidently i read your post and answered, but if you are not happy with my answer i'm sorry.


i never said you were. where did i say that?


that's my point, you seem to be stuck in the wishful part. you complain about the imperfection of democracy, you blank your vote, and you decry the evils of the system-- yet you do nothing to change or improve the system and you don't propose one either, hoping that some social scientist is going to conjure some sort of magical solution.

i'm just pointing out that i consider this attitude misguided and wrong. and i pointed out what i saw as the epistemological roots of your error-- not moral roots, mind you, i am not issuing a moral condemnation, or if i did, that was not the primary objective. my objective was to point out what i see as an error in your understanding of the world, i.e., hoping for impossible and unformulated ideals while withdrawing from the dirty work of reality. im talking here about political choices, nothing else.


you answered that you vote blank as to express your discontent. how is that better than a "close enough" mentality i don't know. it's actually worse.


right, but you have said that you just do nothing constructive. at least when it come to politics i mean. you said you just express your discontent. "i support nothing because nothing is good enough". how is that better than supporting, say, the least harmful choice, or participating in the creation of an alternative? please explain.


neither am i, i don't get the point of your allusion. did any of us say that?


yeah i can't stand mediocrity either, but that doesn't mean giving up on things though. how does your blank vote prevent or combat mediocrity? how does your blank vote promote a better democracy, or an alternative to it? it's like you have 1/2 of the problem figured out but then don't know what to do.


yes yes, forgive my generalization, i meant this discussion to be about your political involvement or lack of it.

the reason i argued with you is that you seem to think that democracies are evil and corrupt and beyond repair. but having experienced dictatorships and their consequences, i can tell you again (because i said this before) that democracies, while not perfect, and 100 times better than tyrannies. and this is a significant thing. because we have to live SOMEWHERE and democracies are worth fighting for. and if you have a democracy and are doing nothing to maintain it or improve it, it's like you're shitting in your own drinking water, and you don't know or can't value the treasure you have.

now, i have to say, mexican democracy is not exactly a democracy, so i can understand your disappointment and paralysis, but you made generalizations about a system of government in a thread about international politics... so while i could agree with "mexican democracy is a sham", i cannot agree with your condemnation of democracy in general. no way.


no sir, no, in the case of politics you are more of a conformist than i am, because you express your discontent but do nothing about it, hence allowing the status quo to remain untouched. i am not a conformist, i DO things to improve, i don't just mutely register my discontent and wish idly for something better; i do put words, money and effort behind the things i support--conformists don't do that.

about the "blank" vote: it's not a blank vote, it's a cancelled one. rather that than voting for the least of evils, it's not a shampoo choice.

"mexican" democracy is no different than any democracy, do you remember the u.s. presidential elections of 2000?

again, i didn't say dictatorship is better, that's hell and i really hope i or anyone have to experience it. you seem to just be relieved that you're not under one anymore and will likely accept the "least worse" alternative. i respect that but still, we can talk all day and all night about governments and how bad they are and how their policies are wrong, it boils down to political systems being badly designed from the start.

so just because i don't post a new way of living for all humanity in a message board of a dumb rock band it means i'm a conformist? it's not an easy answer, and it might not come from one man's head (or maybe it will) but just because of that we can't just discard a possibility.

the choices that exist have not convinced me, so why put words and money and effort to something that either doesn't exist (yet) or i don't believe in.

ps: i refuse to judge or come to conclusions about your person and ideas, as i said above, i respect you.

[!@#$%!]

Originally Posted by Everyneurotic

ps: i refuse to judge or come to conclusions about your person and ideas, as i said above, i respect you.

same here man, i respect you, and i disagree with you, that's why i go to such lenggths to argue with you.

i thought you called me a conformist for putting up with the limitations of democracy & for prefering to protect & defend it over other forms of government... show me something better and i'll convert, but in the meantime this is what i fight for you see, because we have nothing better, but could be much much worse.

i suppose mexican democracy has changed recently after the zapatistas & 70 years of PRI rule, and that prehaps because some people thought they could do a little better. i know it's fashionable to shit on the outgoing president, but if you don't believe me there's been progress in your country, go read that book by whats the name of this guy... jose agustin... his first book, hm... DE PERFIL. and think also about the massacres that came after that book was written. not sure that has happened, has it? but anyway, there are a lot of people in your country fighting to bring true democracy... which is still an incomplete project.

i don't know in how many ways to explain this, but i think that you are wrong on giving up on an incomplete project rather than helping to complete it. im not judging you from a moral stance, but i do criticize your... how can i say this.. your epistemological toolkit? or should i say simply, i think you've arrived to the wrong conclusion due to some faulty premises.

i'd like to discuss thos premises alone if we can. you know, no calling people this or that, just looking at the... way of knowing, so to speak.boil it down to essentials. i think if we narrow the issue sufficiently it will be easy to understand each other.

let's give it a try?

---

so:
let me see if i summarize your points correctly. you seem to be saying:

a) democracy is a flawed system of government
b) because it's flawed, it is not worth supporting it

am i correct?

let me know if i read you right before i continue.