The Devil Inside: As I noted, the differences are in such things as government intrusion. Generally, European parties are more pro-government, whereas America is are anti-government. This is hardly a "cultural" issue that is truly divisive. So long as you don't ask our respective opinions about things like health care, no American and European would give a damn.
Roman: As I've explained a few times, I call myself an Atheist Pantheist, because I do not believe in a personal God, but affirm that the category of existence fulfills much of the qualities of attributed to God in Western theology (omnipotence, omnipresence, eternity, immutability, et cetera...).
James R.: A Deist Pantheist? Hmmm. Perhaps. But that implies creation of the watchmaker sense in the Enlightenment sense, which I do not find valid.
Well, maybe just pantheist, then. Do you believe that a higher being created the universe? A person who believes this, and that the higher being then sat back and watched his universe run, is a deist. On the other hand, perhaps you believe that the universe as a whole is equivalent to God? That just makes you a pantheist. An atheist is somebody who holds no belief in any type of god.
James R.: I affirm no creation, only logical necessity. I only view existence as equalling God in the sense that it fulfills almost the full gamut of Western theological notions of God. But as it is not conscious, it is not properly a divinity.
Do you believe the universe has always existed, or that it had a beginning? Far from it. Most theological notions, including Western ones, involve god(s) who are intimately concerned with human affairs. Mere existence in no way supports the existence of being(s) who are concerned about individuals or even the human species in general.
James R.: Existence is eternal. However, if the Big Bang theory is, as some claim, indicative of a finite-universe, then I do not connect the two concepts. That is to say, the universe would be finite both spatially and in time, but this would indicate that it is likely part of a multiverse which would satisfy the eternal and infinite prerequisites of existence. The standard attributes of God are usually given as: Omnipotence. Omnipresence. Omniscience. Omnibenevolence. Eternity. Infinity. Perfection. Necessity. Immutability. I would argue that existence satisfies omnipotence, omnipresence, omniscience (in a non-conscious sense all information is known within existence), infinity, eternity, immutability (by being eternal it cannot truly undergo change from one thing to another though things change within it), necessity, and perfection (all these qualities are logical perfections). Omnibenevolence is untenable (Epircurus' Paradox) and rightfully speaking, only a conscious being can have moral worth. As existence cannot be considered conscious, it thus couldn't be omnibenevolent even if it wanted to be.
Can you be more specific? In what way is america egalitarian with the exception of affirmative action, equal opportunity, and nonracism in lip service. I disagree with affirmative action but without opportunity, you don't have the chance for excellence or innovation either. Do you know how often people are discriminated against in job opportunities? Discrimination is a practice that has become sneaky because laws don't change people's nature or opinions. It's not the laws or the concept of 'egalitariansim', it's just human competition. American culture is about the almighty dollar. It would seem to me america is exactly a perfect fit for you. Americans are condescending to nonamericans. As i recall you were overjoyed at the thought african-americans defending americana against outsiders. Hehehe.. but many of these people are responsible for your 'destruction of excellence' which your race also supports also by partaking and financing their culture. Again, who is at fault or is this a deceptive game of pin the tail on the donkey. The truth is americans are riffraff with dollars in their pocket. You want excellence, that all depends on how you define excellence. Isn't your economy still running? Does it matter that your riffraff citizens which includes Yeah, "white" people, are running the show. You wanted egalitarianism when it suited you but it doesn't work now does it except you get mud and shit when you don't respect other cultures, races and the finer points of things. You got what your limited vision wanted reaped from your version of egalitarianism bred from egoism, weakness, cultural ignorance, racism, and prejudice. Certainly not true egalitarianism by a system that breeds tolerance because of intolerance. This is the destruction of excellence but your house was built on sand to begin with. Part of the reason is because most people are not that excellent themselves but weak or inferior in many ways and that would include you . Don't you get it, don't you see vice everywhere? Human weakness causes the decimation of excellence bottomline and that blame goes up shitcreek as well.
Iam: The very notion of "one man, one vote" and "everyone has voting rights" is an egalatarian pipedream that is a destroyer of excellence and knowledge. Accordingly, America has a tremendous flaw engrained in her constitution and system, after initially starting off as a relatively well formed and conceived Aristocratic Republic. Regarding my fit with America: However are Americans "condescending" to non-Americans? Whatever does my support of blacks fighting illegal immigrants have to do with this? When did I ever claim to support egalatarianism, even for my race?
I haven't been to Europe outside of Heathrow, but don't you people watch the same television shows, buy the same computers with the same operating system. Aren't Europeans forming the same kind of union that the Americans did 230 years ago? Unfortunately, the cultural exchange seems only to be going one way.
I see the opposite happening. To start a business, not only must you deal with the countless rules and regulations, you must compete with corporations that have vastly more resources. If you're right, than why have the past 15 or so years been all about corporate merging and buyouts? Why is wal-mart style monoculture the new trend? The American system is based on perpetual large-scale growth, without which it will soon collapse. Also, this 're-invidualization' you speak of... is that management speak? Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! Funny observation, I completely disagree. (edit to add: that evola saw a static present)
Hi, I'm not by any means a statistically average European, I think, but I don't own a tv, have a locally assembled computer and a laptop that both run Linux, neither came with Windows pre-installed. And European Union is not exactly a federation or confederation, it's what experts call a super-national organisation, as it is now any way. Most of the music I own records of is Italian, French, German, Austrian, Norwegian, Swedish, Russian, Latvian, Belorussian and Indian, the last three films that I watched were Spanish, French and a France / UK / Luxembourg co-production. Nothing of that is intentional or anti-American, I just happen to like the stuff. So I think the great-americanization of Europe is over-exaggerated, at least from my point of view, and that of my friends too.
Sounds like you're an atheist, PJ. It's just a confusion of word meanings. Of course you can perhaps look at nature or the laws of physics as god. You could equally not see them as God. So it's quite meaningless if you understand where I'm coming from. In my opinion, there is very little difference between a pantheist and an atheist. Atheist is just more accurate terminology.
Fraggle often likes to type up long, involved posts like that, seeing things that no one else can see, as if it's all factual information. Don't pay too much attention to what he says! I agree with you. I think there's a place for small, individualized companies, but those will never take the place of large corporations with vast resources ...it's just not possible. But lest you forget, many of those small, individual companies grow into those large corporations even as others fail and fall by the wayside. A small company that can maintain itself as a small company will be just that ...a small company with limited resources and limited ability to take on anything more than their present client/customer base. It's not much more than having a job at one of the large corporations. Growth, yes; "perpetual large-scale growth"? No. Uncontrolled growth? No. Controlled growth? Yes. There's no reason for it to collapse, but it must constantly change to fit the changing conditions of the market and the client/customer base. A large corporation that "collapses" is one that simply refuses to change in a changing economic environment. Evolution at work, huh? And, of course, not to mention that old farts with old ideas who run the company don't fully grasp the changing market ...it happens more often than not. Mom n' Pop stores in downtown NYC simply couldn't function without the large-scale goods distribution companies that supply them with the goods to sell. Mom n' Pop can't drive out to Iowa to buy the corn, then out to California to buy the lettuce, then down to Argentina to buy the fruit. So companies like Wal-Mart emerge ...ones who can handle that kind of large-scale distribution. But no small, individualized company could ever, EVER, provide customers what a large, well-organized company/corporation can provide. There simply aren't enough resources to do that. Baron Max
Yeah the Americans were kinda cool while they lasted...great setup, poor execution. Lacked staying power, pretty common to democracy/republics.
What I like from the American civilization is rock music, especially Patti Smith and Nirvana, the rest can go to hell. Oh, and Aerosmith.
No. It's that the internet can now link producers and consumers who would have otherwise never met. The webcomic phenomena is one example of newly emerged niches.
This is not growth, this is scavenging. Corporations are dying and the scavengers are eating them to stay in business. Yes there are too many regulations, especially in Blue States like California. My wife cannot start her own chocolate business by time-sharing the premises of a business that only operates during the Christmas season. She must have her own sink, refrigerator, stove, etc. But don't forget that these regulations were enacted at the behest of established businesses, to stifle competition. Most of the growth in the Information Age is in sectors that do not require kitchens or much in the way of tangible equipment at all so they evade the regulations. As they gain influence and the old guard loses, the economy will adjust itself. The American system is now based on scavenging, which will bring about its collapse. Wal-Mart is simply moving manufacturing jobs offshore. This could be a wise move, if the American educational system can start producing high school graduates (and even college graduates) with the literacy and competence to take their place in an Information Age economy. I suppose you could call it that since I am a management consultant, but it's my own coinage. I don't talk about this in my management classes unless I need to scare the dinosaurs. Toffler coined a related word, "prosumers," to apply to people who produce for their own consumption. In the past it applied primarily to subsistence farmers and it wasn't enough dollar value to bother counting in the GDP. Today we have people doing everything from building additions on their own houses to growing their own marijuana; DIY is a huge sector of the economy. But even larger is what people are doing with their computers. Just creating your own music collection is a sizeable dollar-value job... and children are doing it. Perhaps, but he did not see what Toffler, Naisbitt, and others see in the future that argues against his own predictions. I think most of these people are well enough educated to tell the difference between my own observations and opinions and things I have read or learned in other ways. Perhaps not possible in America, and if true that will be the reason for our demise. In other countries where the corporatocracy is not as pervasive, small businesses are making huge additions to the economy with the help of "re-individualizing" forces like the internet and FedEx. I recently read about a women's cooperative in Uruguay who takes orders directly from women's shops in the big cities and then ships their clothes directly to them. No middlemen keystoning the prices six times. Yes, but in Industrial Era America. CAD/CAM technology makes it possible to "manufacture" single items. Mass production is no longer necessary for economies of scale. Elimination of the middlemen means that the producer is making enough profit to not feel the pressure to become gigantic. This reduces the power of venture capitalists and also makes it possible to not have everyone wearing the same shirt and pants from Costco. Except that it devolves the power of decision to the worker and reduces the time lag from concept to consumer that stifles opportunities. Wal-Mart has to order their ton-shipments of fall clothes in winter. The boutiques in New York can order five custom dresses for a party from those ladies in Uruguay over the internet, have them shipped up by UPS, and deliver them to the partygoers in two weeks. The customers have something they simply could not have had in an Industrial Era economy without being fabulously wealthy, the shopkeepers have a stable business, and the uruguayas make more money than their husbands. We'll still buy our blue jeans from Levi's, I suppose, although they'll be made in Bangladesh. There will be a niche for the megacorporation but it won't dominate one third of the world like it did in the last century. People here on the East Coast have accustomed themselves to eating "fresh" produce that is picked green and truck-ripened. It tastes terrible. The food sector is a Soylent Green dystopia. Everyone is fed but they're fed crap. I don't know whether the Information Age can solve this problem but if it doesn't, it stands as an illustration of what's worst about the Industrial Era. One of the things I miss most about California is the food. Absolutely. Another person (and hopefully one much younger than myself) who can see the future clearly. The Industrial Era created entire new sectors that came to dominate the economy. Who could have foreseen motor vehicles, vacations, entertainment, news, and exercise as full-fledged industries? Likewise, the post-industrial era will create new sectors that will dwarf the food and clothing that Wal-Mart sells. The futurists predict that the buyers and sellers will be numerous and small-scale, including a great many prosumers.
