And you guys thought *I* was nuts.

[CKay]

But they will be unable to maintain the infrastructure. Unless Allah wills it.

Ah, but I thought your argument was that Arabs don't do machinery - and Turkey isn't an Arabic nation (the Turks were originally from Central Asia).

[MSimon]

Why the Arabs will not last long enough to employ solar or anything else:

Their crisis is this year. Not 40 years hence:

http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/ND11Ak01.html

[MSimon]

But they will be unable to maintain the infrastructure. Unless Allah wills it.

Ah, but I thought your argument was that Arabs don't do machinery - and Turkey isn't an Arabic nation (the Turks were originally from Central Asia).

Did you read deAtkine? It is culture and political culture. Not just Arab/Islam.

You need an education in a lot of things. Real world engineering to start. Real world politics as well. Real world economics too.

Not to worry. We all start out young and stupid. The crime is getting old while remaining stupid.

[CKay]

But they will be unable to maintain the infrastructure. Unless Allah wills it.

Ah, but I thought your argument was that Arabs don't do machinery - and Turkey isn't an Arabic nation (the Turks were originally from Central Asia).

Did you read deAtkine? It is culture and political culture. Not just Arab/Islam.

It's specifically about Arab military and political culture (the title is a big clue). The Turks, having their own quite distinct culture and history, most definitively are not Arabs.

You need an education in a lot of things. Real world engineering to start. Real world politics as well. Real world economics too.

Hmm... from the man who seems to think that the word Islamic is interchangeable with Arabic (thus making Turkey, Iran, Pakistan, Afghanistan, Bangladesh, Indonesia etc all Arabic states).... I'll give the 'real world' education a miss, thanks all the same .

[Diogenes]

And it's been pointed out that "I think therefore I am" is a circular argument and is thus not as indubitable as Descartes claimed.

I would suggest that as an expression of it's own existence it serves well as it's own proof. As Isaac Asimov (I think) said to the question "Do we exist?"

"Who's asking?"

Oh, I take my own existence as self evident. Not to say that to seriously consider the alternative would serve no purpose.

It is axiomatic that any morality which lessens chances for survival is a non-viable system from an evolutionary standpoint.

Hmm, yep - but the evolutionary viability of a system is not the same thing as the moral truth of that system.

If it cannot survive, it is obviously a false system.

[Diogenes]

It is axiomatic that any morality which lessens chances for survival is a non-viable system from an evolutionary standpoint.

OTOH, if your argument is that the moral system that ensures its survival is the best moral system, then surely that makes the outcome you're suggesting here:

Islam is a meme. It spreads by reproduction AND by direct transfer. What this means is that at some point it will be big enough to swing elections, and at that point it will continuously vote the reins of government to aid in it's spread.

no bad thing?

Exactly. It appears that Islam may end up being evolutionarily superior due to the fact that it will survive and exist, while other religions and dogmas will die off and be forgotten.

It operates in accordance with rule of Morality number 1:

Survival.

Something that does not exist cannot exert any influence.

[Diogenes]

Britain has already had trouble dealing with militants in this regard.

At least a couple of thousand years experience of dealing with them.

I think during some of that time, the usual solution was to kill them or drive them out.

That didn't work so well for the Normans though.

[Diogenes]

Why do you think all Muslim folks are Sharia folks? I would argue the opposite.

I would suggest that they don't have to be sharia. The Islamic meme is very powerful because it has little tolerance for deviation within it's system of influence. It is like a virus that copies itself well, and makes every effort to insure the accuracy of it's copy onto the next generation.

I can't wait to see them dealing with the militant atheists! I suspect they will be highly successful at imparting a fear of God into people who don't believe in one.

Your idea seems posited in Islam being united. It is far from, and never will be.

I also beg to differ about accuracy of copy. Each generation takes its own spin, and the spin can be more or less "rigid". I would also say that the hard over varieties are suffering from the modern world. There has been a dichonomy created between rigid fundamentalism and modern technology and communications. The root issue seems to be that folks are self discovering better things to do. .

Good point. MSimon (and others, including myself) have jokingly suggested that porn and Western culture would be the undoing of Islam. Sure, why not? If it can ruin us, it will probably do just as good of a job at ruining them.

The growth areas for hard over types is centered in the "disaffected". Those who lack something better to do if you will. This is the same phenomena that brought forth "ghettoism" and inner city gangs. Ironically, the social model is also very similar to that of prison populations. In this it becomes a self licking ice-cream cone. Affiliation to anti-establishment promotes entry into the correctional system which further nutures the anti-establishment behaviors, and so on around the circle. The only self limiting feature about the cycle seems to be eventually the ice-cream licks itself out of existence. But, each ice-cream is one unto itself...

I have previously said that one of the major problems facing the Islamic world is the fact that wealth is stratified into two major groups. The very rich, and the very poor. The middle class is relatively weak in many Islamic societies, and the poor turn to religion because it offers them comfort in a world lacking opportunity for advancement.

I have also said that the Bush Invasion of Iraq, (if it is not preempted by stupidity) may result in the successful creation of a large middle class in Iraq, and thereby stabilize the society enough to make it more able to rebuff the efforts of those who would keep it in chaos. (or move it towards theocracy.)

If people can see an opportunity for advancement, they are more likely to focus their energies on advancing themselves than on attacking others, and if enough people are happy with the way things are going, they are more likely to be intolerant of those who would disrupt their opportunities.

Anyway, what you are talking about is a vicious circle, and I see it being played out in exactly that manner in the Ghettos of America. The incentives are all wrong. Indulging in reckless behavior (Promiscuity, drugs, etc.) results in bad consequences down the road. Not just for those who engage in it, but for those of us who have to put up with them as well.

The Government needs to stop incentivizing foolish behavior.

[Diogenes]

One of the stories I've heard out of Britian is that the moderate muslims have been reporting the radicals to the authorities right from the get go, but the moderates all say the government does nothing in response.

The conclusion drawn is that the British government is deliberately allowing the radical islamists to plot trouble as agent provocateurs, the better to justify the coming police state.

That is one explanation, however I think I have a far simpler one. The British Society has become so infused with politically correct thinking that they really cannot help but fall all over themselves apologizing if they dare intrude into an area with cultural or religious sensitivities.

They are simply afraid to crack down on the radicals because they are too sensitive to the radical's feelings.

This is a predictable consequence of the " Womanizing " of social norms. Men are becoming effeminate because to behave in a manly fashion is considered offensive nowadays.

[Diogenes]

It is axiomatic that any morality which lessens chances for survival is a non-viable system from an evolutionary standpoint.

OTOH, if your argument is that the moral system that ensures its survival is the best moral system, then surely that makes the outcome you're suggesting here:

Islam is a meme. It spreads by reproduction AND by direct transfer. What this means is that at some point it will be big enough to swing elections, and at that point it will continuously vote the reins of government to aid in it's spread.

no bad thing?

I'd suggest that militant islam is like a virulent disease that spreads aggressively, until eventually
- killing the hosts it needs.
- the remaining hosts develop immunity.
or
- the disease adapts to be less deadly.

I note that the economies of many Muslim dominated nations would quickly implode if cut off from the rest of the world. Hoping for new energy tech that makes that more possible.

I agree, and actually I regard it as our duty to cut off the money supply from the U.S. to the middle east. I am doing my part. I am putting together a natural gas filling station, and converting all of my vehicles to run on compressed natural gas.

I think I can currently buy it for something like $0.50/gallon. (GGE)

It is our duty as a nation to stop providing money to people who hate us. (Including the Liberals in Hollywood. I prefer foreign films anyway.)

[Diogenes]

Britain has already had trouble dealing with militants in this regard.

At least a couple of thousand years experience of dealing with them.

My guess is your best area for push back against the radical muslim world view would be muslim women. Easy for a muslim male Iman to say "more babies, more babies in Xyears we will own them." But it is women who have to have those 6 babies(or more) each. Their the ones who go through the Cesareans, breech births etc. damaging/aging the body. In the "old country" they can overwhelm them with concensus thinking that this is the only way the Koran says so. But in secular europe they will be aware of women who have 1-2 kids each(or none), work, get divorced from abusive spouses etc. They will be exposed to these ideas that a woman has a right to control her own body. Doubt if even the muslim brotherhood in Egypt expects that women will vote them in to take their vote away(I hope).

It would not surprise me at all if Women voted men into power who would then deprive them of the vote. I personally think passing the 19th amendment was a mistake. I think much of the subsequent foolishness this nation has endured was a consequence of that mistake.


Rather than exclude women per se, I would simply require a voter to be a taxpayer. Women who can earn income on which taxes are paid can be presumed to be intelligent enough to vote.

Even if they are not, they are at least contributing to the upkeep of the government, and therefore ought to have a say.

[CKay]

If it cannot survive, it is obviously a false system.

Non sequitur.

[Diogenes]

At least a couple of thousand years experience of dealing with them.

My guess is your best area for push back against the radical muslim world view would be muslim women. Easy for a muslim male Iman to say "more babies, more babies in Xyears we will own them." But it is women who have to have those 6 babies(or more) each. Their the ones who go through the Cesareans, breech births etc. damaging/aging the body. In the "old country" they can overwhelm them with concensus thinking that this is the only way the Koran says so. But in secular europe they will be aware of women who have 1-2 kids each(or none), work, get divorced from abusive spouses etc. They will be exposed to these ideas that a woman has a right to control her own body. Doubt if even the muslim brotherhood in Egypt expects that women will vote them in to take their vote away(I hope).

No-one dislikes the cultural baggage in some varieties of islam more than me: female slavery, feuds and honour killings, ideological war.

But before you condemn it let me point out that some varieties of Christianity have until very recent times shared all these atributes. Not suprising because the three book religions all have much in common and derive from the same middle-eastern culture.

In fact some varieties of Christianity still have all these attributes, but they have little traction, except in a few areas of the US and Africa.

I'm not here comparing the two religions to say one is better or worse than the other. Just that both can be enlightened or appalling, and the trend towards enlightenment winning, in liberal democreatic cultures, is equal in both.

I have long regarded Islam as at about the same point as Christianity was during the middle ages. Christianity had it's denominational wars and it's religious backwardness. ( The Inquisition. Galileo's imprisonment, etc.)

Over time, Islam may well evolve in the manner that Christianity did. It may likely do so faster due to the influence of modern communications.

However, it is still currently stuck in the middle ages, and it is therefore necessary to be wary of it.

[Diogenes]

I note that the economies of many Muslim dominated nations would quickly implode if cut off from the rest of the world. Hoping for new energy tech that makes that more possible.

1. Developed economies are far more vulnerable - an undeveloped North African nation would weather isolation more easily than, say, the UK.

I intend to give them the opportunity.

2. New energy technology - cheap solar - will make many Islamic nations more self dependent in energy, not less.

It will work as well as Solyndra. (Barring some sort of breakthrough.)

3. What a thoroughly despicable, nasty thing to wish on any people, whatever their religion (I bet you're loving the famine in the Sahel ).

You should see what happened in the American Civil War.

[Diogenes]

2. New energy technology - cheap solar - will make many Islamic nations more self dependent in energy, not less.

UH. You have information on that that you are keeping from us?

The cost of solar has reached grid parity in many countries now and is certainly cheaper than the diesel generators that are commonly used for electrical power. But change "will" to "would" if you want. It doesn't anyway affect the point I was making - new energy techs could potentially make islamic countries less vulnerable to external forces.

I am keeping my eye on this.


http://nextbigfuture.com/2011/03/wave-d ... times.html