30-Jan-11 News -- Rioting continues in Egypt

[John]

30-Jan-11 News -- Rioting continues in Egypt, as young demonstrators demand 'change'

Global food crisis continues to grow

** 30-Jan-11 News -- Rioting continues in Egypt, as young demonstrators demand 'change'
** http://www.generationaldynamics.com/cgi ... 30#e110130

[burt]

Hello,this is STILL not the answer about what you learned on Egypt???? and why you changed your mind upon which FACTS?

Then some remarks:
I'm not happy when you use the words "Muslim", "Jew", "Christian". these words mean NOTHING.
These are MEN and WOMEN, and men and women lives locally. These words are general words, and you have to take into account that they are REAL men (much more complex that an "lbel")
so 1st the man, then its origin then its affiliation then its religion.

For example a American Pakistani living in New York is a man (with individual emotions) with a double affiliation and he's CHOOSEN to live in America, so he is New Yorker FIRST (don't make be believe that America is ONE country united, it is NOT united, not more than Europe), then Pakistani (this means an internal conflict for the CHILDREN of that guy), then a Muslim FROM Pakistan (and there it depends if he is a Sunni or a Shia from Pakistan and if he lives in the north or by the ocean)

When you say American Muslim will help America it does NOT have sense, the answer is "For sure" their own interest" are in America and religion is the LAST affiliation you use (except when you have been "hijacked"), first you try to leave nicely somewhere and it is when you cannot do it (or that you think that you cannot or when you have a conflict of affiliation), that you move to religion.

It is the same for Jews and for Christian.

So please in this blog, specially because you insist that the conflict is local, don't use the words "Jew"-"Muslim"-"Christian" and even "Arab" (most people don't even know that Iran is NOT Arab).
These general undefined words could be used to build hate, and with hate you bring people to war.
Please do NOT participate to this movement, I know this is NOT your meaning so don't swim with the sharks.

For example conflict between Arab and Jews is NOT a reality, the war of 1948 is a reality, don't shorten-it

Politics make war, so When I write that if Egypt move to shiria law if will be bad for us, it is because I think it
If shiria law is introduced in Egypt it does NOT mean that it will become a terrorist country or that you'll be killed if you are american and you travel to Egypt.
It does NOT mean neither that we will not be able to make business with Egypt.

BUT that this kind of law is fully incompatible with the laws we have built in the West (and I do not know which is the best, this is NOT my purpose).
AT That point (and IF it happens, which is far from granted yet), the West will have to react in stopping the immigration and explicating that people with shiria law are NOT allowed to emigrate to the West IF they want to keep it.
so it would harden the complex relationship we have here in Europe with people from North Africa and people from the East Mediterranean countries. This VERY complex relationship is NOT AT ALL understood when you see it from America.

Because (my feeling, not more) governments don't want to take responsibility to anything it will open the road (or the highways) for extremism...

[John]

Dear Bertrand,

> I'm not happy when you use the words "Muslim", "Jew",
> "Christian". these words mean NOTHING. These are MEN and WOMEN,
> and men and women lives locally. These words are general words,
> and you have to take into account that they are REAL men (much
> more complex that an "lbel") so 1st the man, then its origin then
> its affiliation then its religion.

In the context that I use these words, these are self-identifications
of identity groups. Every person is an individual, but in groups
they have a group identity -- Communist, used car salesman,
northerner, southerner, black, white, Muslim, Jew, Christian. A
single person will belong to many identity groups.

** Chapter 3 -- The Principle of Localization I
** http://www.generationaldynamics.com/cgi ... alization1

> So please in this blog, specially because you insist that the
> conflict is local, don't use the words "Jew"-"Muslim"-"Christian"
> and even "Arab" (most people don't even know that Iran is NOT
> Arab).

> These general undefined words could be used to build hate, and
> with hate you bring people to war.

> Please do NOT participate to this movement, I know this is NOT
> your meaning so don't swim with the sharks.

> For example conflict between Arab and Jews is NOT a reality, the
> war of 1948 is a reality, don't shorten-it

First, I categorically reject the idea that my writing on Generational
Dynamics is going to cause war.

If you're going to object to my characterization of the 1948 war
as a war between Arabs and Jews, then please suggest alternative
names for the two groups that were fighting. As far as I know,
the two groups identify themselves as Arabs and Jews, and that's
good enough for me.

> Politics make war,

A major foundation of Generational Dynamics is that wars (at least
crisis wars) come from the people, not from the politicians.

> BUT that this kind of law is fully incompatible with the laws we
> have built in the West (and I do not know which is the best, this
> is NOT my purpose). AT That point (and IF it happens, which is
> far from granted yet), the West will have to react in stopping the
> immigration and explicating that people with shiria law are NOT
> allowed to emigrate to the West IF they want to keep it. so it
> would harden the complex relationship we have here in Europe with
> people from North Africa and people from the East Mediterranean
> countries. This VERY complex relationship is NOT AT ALL understood
> when you see it from America.

Really, Bertrand, this is fantasy. We accepted immigrants from
Nazi Germany before the war, and we're accepting immigrants from
China today. If you really believe what you've written, then
please give me a historical example of something that illustrates
what you're talking about.

John

[burt]

In the context that I use these words, these are self-identifications
of identity groups. Every person is an individual, but in groups
they have a group identity -- Communist, used car salesman,
northerner, southerner, black, white, Muslim, Jew, Christian. A
single person will belong to many identity groups.

** Chapter 3 -- The Principle of Localization I
** http://www.generationaldynamics.com/cgi ... alization1

It is because of the principle of Localization which I agree on, that I do NOT agree with single words as "Muslim", "Communism" "Jews" and so on...
Muslim Shia (or sunnit) from America OR Muslim Shia (or sunnit) from Egypt is what I suggest.

Capitalism OR Communism also have a different meaning depending at least on the continent which uses this words.

First, I categorically reject the idea that my writing on Generational
Dynamics is going to cause war.

I wouldn't even write to you if I thought it was, sorry if you interpreted my remark this way.
But words ARE important and using general wors ARE dangerous because every one can simply make its own projection on them and then you enter in the non-ending world of "good","bad","terrorist" without keeping in mind that the reality IS local, concerns Men and has an history.
It the the great force of the blog you created, and it is because I have a great respect on what you do, that I made my remarks.
It is in the hope of keeping this blog at the high level of thinking I recognize you have.

If you're going to object to my characterization of the 1948 war
as a war between Arabs and Jews, then please suggest alternative
names for the two groups that were fighting. As far as I know,
the two groups identify themselves as Arabs and Jews, and that's
good enough for me.

Not good enough for me, it was kind of simplification just (an hypothesis) to rebuild the "great time" of a hypothetical nation from Araby (it was the Idea of Lawrence from Arabia, but it was a myth, as Arabs ARE very diversified (and this has always been one of their forces).

The fact is that Egypt tried to fight the new country of Israel because it was an opportunity to take control of a vaccum of power with the Great Britain which was out of ressource to maintain its power in this region.
At the same time Russia and US were begining the "Cold War" AND for America "reinforcing its empire" meant, at that precise time, being the worst ennemy of Europe in the Middle East (controlling oil began to be seen as something of a strategical importance).

This is a littler bit short, I could write more on the subject, but Arabs and Jews were, on my point of view, just words to reinforce the concepts of groups and so giving strength to the army.

A major foundation of Generational Dynamics is that wars (at least crisis wars) come from the people, not from the politicians.

Yes I agree with that

We accepted immigrants from
Nazi Germany before the war, and we're accepting immigrants from
China today. If you really believe what you've written, then
please give me a historical example of something that illustrates
what you're talking about.John

Immigrants ARE very important (and vital) for ANY country from the West (first because the natality is too low). We NEED migrant, so

I just say that shiria law is VERY different from the kind of laws we built in the West, and once you get migrants in your country, the normal path is that they integrate themselves and become part of the country.

It was the case for germans (who were happy to find a country on where to go), it is more or less the case with Chinese (more or less because a lot of rich chinese reinvest their money in their "homeland" and they are something between chinese and americans, some of them more americans that chinese, some of them more chinese than americans).
This is first time in the West that we are confronted with this kind of "double nationality" (with this level of immigration, I mean) and such a difference between the first generation and the second one.
Studying the psychology of the migrants began ONLY in the 80's.
This is a new experience, we'll see where we go.

Today some Muslim people in Europe (you have that in some towns of Netherlands) want to IMPOSE the shiria law INSIDE Europe, IT WON'T WORK, this is not a theoritical problem, it is becoming every day a harder problem to solve.
If the West doesn't makes its rules clear (it is IMPOSSIBLE to accept the laws from Europe AND, at the same time the shiria law, so who is going to win, I do not know)
For me if people keep their positions we are going to a wall...

The problem IS NOT the migrants, it is when the migrants think that they have the right to CHANGE in an unilateral way, the laws of the country which acepted them.

So for me again IF Egypt moves to the shiria law we are in a new unknown (and dangerous) situation.

You never answered about what you learned on Egypt that makes you thinking suddenly that there is no more risk of a Civil War in Egypt

[JanetC]

Hi John,
As always your analysis is spot on. I've been sharing your insights with my influence group to give a great perspective.
When you understand generational theory, you understand a lot! The food prices in Egypt must have skyrocketed.
Best wishes, Janet C.