Originally Posted by Andy '85

Originally Posted by Hermione Granger

5,000 Europeans who vacationed in the regions hit by the tsunami are missing, including 2,500 from Sweden.

http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNew...0_70?hub=World

For Sweden, this tragedy dwarfs 9/11 -- less than 9 million people live in Sweden.

Any predictions as to whether this will be a spark that helps shake Europe out of the 3T?

Unlikely, I think. While the tsunami was of near-global proportions, it was simply - not to diminish the impact - a natural disaster. It will force many to look harder into understanding the workings of the planet and better prepare for it, but due to the infrequent nature of such events I don't think a paradigm shift is in order for this tragedy.

You're probably right, but we'll have to see how this plays out.

Originally Posted by Marx & Lennon

BTW, it is unique to Christians. Refer to Differences: Practices for a moderate Muslim view.

Originally Posted by HopefulCynic68

As for 'validation', that misses the point. What the self-destructive element of the Western elite wants to do is use state power to de-Christianize the West. The effect of that would be suicide.

No, you want to use the government to make Christianity 'first among equals'.

It's already first among equals, it doesn't have to be 'made' so. If no state action occurs, Christianity is the religion that shapes the society and culture, even in those regions of the West that havely largely lost faith. For example, it's useless to try to analyze why, say, the countries of Northern Europe are the way they are, relative to the southern reaches, without analyzing the impact of Protestantism in the north compared to the largely Catholic south.

Christianity is the defining religion of the West, like it or not. Many of the Western elites don't like it, and are trying to change it by force. What many of them want is for religion to be a purely private matter with no relevance to the public arena, which can never be.

Originally Posted by Marx & Lennon

BTW, it is unique to Christians.

Over 1000 years of practical history says you're wrong. Sorry.

Originally Posted by Sabinius Invictus

Originally Posted by Marx & Lennon

Originally Posted by HopefulCynic68

What the self-destructive element of the Western elite wants to do is use state power to de-Christianize the West.

No, you want to use the government to make Christianity 'first among equals'.

Personally, I think that BOTH accusations are equally true - that BOTH sides want to ram their personal preferences on the matter down 'those @&%?*$!' throats - sideways! :evil:

There is of course a great deal of truth in that. At the end of the day, everyone believes in imposing their morality on the world, to a greater or lesser degree.

Originally Posted by Hermione Granger

5,000 Europeans who vacationed in the regions hit by the tsunami are missing, including 2,500 from Sweden.

http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNew...0_70?hub=World

For Sweden, this tragedy dwarfs 9/11 -- less than 9 million people live in Sweden.

Any predictions as to whether this will be a spark that helps shake Europe out of the 3T?

I doubt it. If S&H are right (and I think they are pretty much 100% on this one), it isn't the size or heat of the spark that matters, it's how dry the fuel is. My impression of most of Europe is that the fuel is still very, very damp, probably about where America was around, oh, 1997 or '98.

I look at Europe and see signs of emerging tensions that remind me of America about five to seven years ago.

Of course, to extend the analogy, once a fire gets burning it can dry out fuel elsewhere, so Europe might not need the full 5-7 years to reach flammability, if America ignites in the immediate future.

Originally Posted by HopefulCynic68

Originally Posted by Marx & Lennon

BTW, it is unique to Christians.

Over 1000 years of practical history says you're wrong. Sorry.

In the sense that "Muslim evangelizing" was once done at the point of a sword, I believe HC is correct.

Of course, one could also observe that Christian evangelizing has also had its violent element.

Funny how that happens, eh?

Originally Posted by HopefulCynic68

Originally Posted by Hermione Granger

5,000 Europeans who vacationed in the regions hit by the tsunami are missing, including 2,500 from Sweden.

http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNew...0_70?hub=World

For Sweden, this tragedy dwarfs 9/11 -- less than 9 million people live in Sweden.

Any predictions as to whether this will be a spark that helps shake Europe out of the 3T?

I doubt it. If S&H are right (and I think they are pretty much 100% on this one), it isn't the size or heat of the spark that matters, it's how dry the fuel is. My impression of most of Europe is that the fuel is still very, very damp, probably about where America was around, oh, 1997 or '98.

The reason I think the fuel is still too wet, as I've observed before, is that I think the Adaptive/Idealist dividing line is later in Europe than America. Thus an age cohort that in America is solidly Boomer in Europe would still be firmly Silent. America emerged from 4T (IMO) in 1945-46, much of Europe remained in a rather flattened 4T mode probably into the 50s, maybe well into the 50s in some locales. Further, the early Euroboomer cohorts may be a little less intensely Idealist, because Europe had the experience of emerging into a 1T dominated by the conflict between outside powers (America and the USSR), so their 'High' was marked by a sense of lessening, in powers that previously had dominated the globe.

The European Union looks, to me, to be an almost quintessentially Adaptive institution. While it predates the Eurosilents in its conception and earliest planning, it came of age in a 3T, and it almost embodies process and subtle nuance. Brussels has come to be known for having a rule for every situation, and a goal of almost self-parodying political correctness. The formal political language of the EU makes Washington's bureaucratese seem transparent and straightforward.

All this makes sense if you stop to consider that Europe's Elders grew up in the Second World War or its immediate aftermath, with cities in rubble, friends and family dead and maimed on a scale America never experienced, and all the imperial trappings and glories of the immediate past dissolved away in fire. 'Never again' is a slogan probably far more descriptive of Eurosilents than American Silents, or to turn it the other way around, American Silents are probably less intensely Adaptive than their Euro counterparts.

Unfortunately, they also appear to me to be facing the basic problem that bedevils Adaptive Generations as the 4T transition begins to approach, they reach impasses that simply can not be resolved by process and reason. The EU looks to be in danger of finding itself stuck in just such a cul de sac. Its proponents can list a hundred rational, reasonable arguments for why the EU should be expanded and supported, but they can't make people care emotionally.

They can present a dozen different well-reasoned and rational diplomatic arguments for more international cooperation and a deemphasis on national self-interest, they can rhapodize about the virtues of 'soft power', but they still discover that influence in the world flows more from guns than from diplomacy.

America's Silent elites found themselves in much that position, in a vastly lesser degree, in the late 90s.

Originally Posted by Kiff 1961

Originally Posted by HopefulCynic68

Originally Posted by Marx & Lennon

BTW, it is unique to Christians.

Over 1000 years of practical history says you're wrong. Sorry.

In the sense that "Muslim evangelizing" was once done at the point of a sword, I believe HC is correct.

Of course, one could also observe that Christian evangelizing has also had its violent element.

Funny how that happens, eh?

As I said, both Islam and Christianity have, as stated goals, the wish to become the universal Faith. It's inherent in the beliefs. What doesn't have to be true is that they spread by violence, indeed proselytization by violence is possibly the ultimate perversion of Christianity, and it's happened all too often.

But the universalist goal of Christianity, as embodied by the Catholic Church in the Middle Ages, was passed on to Western secular culture, which emerged from the mold of the Church at the end of the Middle Ages.
When neocons, feminists, free marketeers, socialists, Communists (Communism was a Western creation), etc, set out to spread their tenets world-wide (and all have, among many others) they are following a cultural impulse hardwired into the West's operating system.

China, too, has its universalist tendencies. India, OTOH, doesn't seem to. Cultures have their long-term imperatives, that show up over and over.

Here is an excellent practical example of why the notion that public morality, religious morality, and the role of the state cannot be kept entirely separate, they inevitably overlap.


The following is quoted without intention of profit or infringement for the purpose of discussion and illustration only.

Compulsory Prostitution


'If you don't take a job as a prostitute, we can stop your benefits'
By Clare Chapman
(Filed: 30/01/2005)

A 25-year-old waitress who turned down a job providing "sexual services'' at a brothel in Berlin faces possible cuts to her unemployment benefit under laws introduced this year.

Prostitution was legalised in Germany just over two years ago and brothel owners ? who must pay tax and employee health insurance ? were granted access to official databases of jobseekers.

The waitress, an unemployed information technology professional, had said that she was willing to work in a bar at night and had worked in a cafe.

She received a letter from the job centre telling her that an employer was interested in her "profile'' and that she should ring them. Only on doing so did the woman, who has not been identified for legal reasons, realise that she was calling a brothel.

Under Germany's welfare reforms, any woman under 55 who has been out of work for more than a year can be forced to take an available job ? including in the sex industry ? or lose her unemployment benefit. Last month German unemployment rose for the 11th consecutive month to 4.5 million, taking the number out of work to its highest since reunification in 1990.

The government had considered making brothels an exception on moral grounds, but decided that it would be too difficult to distinguish them from bars. As a result, job centres must treat employers looking for a prostitute in the same way as those looking for a dental nurse.

When the waitress looked into suing the job centre, she found out that it had not broken the law. Job centres that refuse to penalise people who turn down a job by cutting their benefits face legal action from the potential employer.

"There is now nothing in the law to stop women from being sent into the sex industry," said Merchthild Garweg, a lawyer from Hamburg who specialises in such cases. "The new regulations say that working in the sex industry is not immoral any more, and so jobs cannot be turned down without a risk to benefits."

Miss Garweg said that women who had worked in call centres had been offered jobs on telephone sex lines. At one job centre in the city of Gotha, a 23-year-old woman was told that she had to attend an interview as a "nude model", and should report back on the meeting. Employers in the sex industry can also advertise in job centres, a move that came into force this month. A job centre that refuses to accept the advertisement can be sued.

Tatiana Ulyanova, who owns a brothel in central Berlin, has been searching the online database of her local job centre for recruits.

"Why shouldn't I look for employees through the job centre when I pay my taxes just like anybody else?" said Miss Ulyanova.

Ulrich Kueperkoch wanted to open a brothel in Goerlitz, in former East Germany, but his local job centre withdrew his advertisement for 12 prostitutes, saying it would be impossible to find them.

Mr Kueperkoch said that he was confident of demand for a brothel in the area and planned to take a claim for compensation to the highest court. Prostitution was legalised in Germany in 2002 because the government believed that this would help to combat trafficking in women and cut links to organised crime.

Miss Garweg believes that pressure on job centres to meet employment targets will soon result in them using their powers to cut the benefits of women who refuse jobs providing sexual services.

"They are already prepared to push women into jobs related to sexual services, but which don't count as prostitution,'' she said.

"Now that prostitution is no longer considered by the law to be immoral, there is really nothing but the goodwill of the job centres to stop them from pushing women into jobs they don't want to do."

Originally Posted by HopefulCynic68

Here is an excellent practical example of why the notion that public morality, religious morality, and the role of the state cannot be kept entirely separate, they inevitably overlap.

This isn't any different than forcing someone to take on a demeaning job, say one in which their job is to take verbal abuse from people. They must already have protections from forcing people to take dangerous jobs and they just need to add another class of protection from demeaning jobs. Immorality doesn't need to enter into it.

Originally Posted by jeffw

Originally Posted by HopefulCynic68

Here is an excellent practical example of why the notion that public morality, religious morality, and the role of the state cannot be kept entirely separate, they inevitably overlap.

This isn't any different than forcing someone to take on a demeaning job, say one in which their job is to take verbal abuse from people. They must already have protections from forcing people to take dangerous jobs and they just need to add another class of protection from demeaning jobs. Immorality doesn't need to enter into it.

I think the level of demeaning puts it in a whole other category. I would not compare prostitution with, say, telemarketing.

Originally Posted by HopefulCynic68

Here is an excellent practical example of why the notion that public morality, religious morality, and the role of the state cannot be kept entirely separate, they inevitably overlap.

Only insofar as the state spreads out into the civic sphere. Why did the events of HC's article happen? I submit that, once the state lumbered into the field of public charity, this type of result was a given in all but the details. Properly restrained (if such a thing is possible), a state cannot impact morality, improperly restrained, it is certain to impact it -- over time, more and more negatively.

Originally Posted by HopefulCynic68

Here is an excellent practical example of why the notion that public morality, religious morality, and the role of the state cannot be kept entirely separate, they inevitably overlap.

http://www.snopes.com/media/notnews/brothel.asp

Most German-language sources on this topic point to an 18 December 2004 article from the Berlin newspaper Tageszeitung, which (as far as our rusty command of German allows us to discern) does not report that women in Germany must accept employment in brothels or face cuts in their unemployment benefits. The article merely presents that concept as a technical possibility under current law ? it does not cite any actual cases of women losing their benefits over this issue, and it quotes representatives from employment agencies as saying that while it might be legally permissible to reduce unemployment benefits to women who have declined to accept employment as prostitutes, they (the agencies) would not actually do that.

We suspect this is another case where, like a game of "telephone," a story has been garbled as it has passed from one news source to the next, and somewhere in the rewriting and translating process what was originally discussed as a mere hypothetical possibility has now been reported as a factual occurrence.

Last updated: 31 January 2005

Originally Posted by Justin '77

Originally Posted by HopefulCynic68

Here is an excellent practical example of why the notion that public morality, religious morality, and the role of the state cannot be kept entirely separate, they inevitably overlap.

Only insofar as the state spreads out into the civic sphere. Why did the events of HC's article happen? I submit that, once the state lumbered into the field of public charity, this type of result was a given in all but the details.

This is of course true, as far as it goes. A minimalist government could reduce its acts of commission in matters of public morality, though such a state would remain involved in acts of omission.

But as a practical matter, the electorates of every Western democracy have refused to support a Libertarian-style government, decade after decade after decade. America actually comes closer than most.

Even if Kiff is right about the potential 'garbing' of the story (if it is garbed, it'll probably be clear one way or the other soon), the basic point is valid.

Originally Posted by Distinguished Toastmaster

Originally Posted by jeffw

Originally Posted by HopefulCynic68

Here is an excellent practical example of why the notion that public morality, religious morality, and the role of the state cannot be kept entirely separate, they inevitably overlap.

This isn't any different than forcing someone to take on a demeaning job, say one in which their job is to take verbal abuse from people. They must already have protections from forcing people to take dangerous jobs and they just need to add another class of protection from demeaning jobs. Immorality doesn't need to enter into it.

I think the level of demeaning puts it in a whole other category. I would not compare prostitution with, say, telemarketing.

I'm not proud. How much does it pay? :wink:

Originally Posted by Kiff 1961

Originally Posted by HopefulCynic68

Here is an excellent practical example of why the notion that public morality, religious morality, and the role of the state cannot be kept entirely separate, they inevitably overlap.

http://www.snopes.com/media/notnews/brothel.asp

Most German-language sources on this topic point to an 18 December 2004 article from the Berlin newspaper Tageszeitung, which (as far as our rusty command of German allows us to discern) does not report that women in Germany must accept employment in brothels or face cuts in their unemployment benefits. The article merely presents that concept as a technical possibility under current law ? it does not cite any actual cases of women losing their benefits over this issue, and it quotes representatives from employment agencies as saying that while it might be legally permissible to reduce unemployment benefits to women who have declined to accept employment as prostitutes, they (the agencies) would not actually do that.

We suspect this is another case where, like a game of "telephone," a story has been garbled as it has passed from one news source to the next, and somewhere in the rewriting and translating process what was originally discussed as a mere hypothetical possibility has now been reported as a factual occurrence.

Last updated: 31 January 2005

Bravo. Lacking hand-clapping smilies, accept these as virtual substitutes: :lol: 8) :lol: 8) :lol: 8)

Originally Posted by Marx & Lennon

Bravo. Lacking hand-clapping smilies, accept these as virtual substitutes: :lol: 8) :lol: 8) :lol: 8)

Thanks, David. But the Kossacks deserve the credit here.

This article posted here for educational and discussion purposes only:

Eye On Europe

Europe?s China Connection

Recently transatlantic relations between the US and Europe appear to have been improving. A conciliatory tone from the Bush administration has been met with receptive ears in European capitals as they prepare to receive the American President in February. This new, upbeat mood about the relationship between America and Europe may be soon spoiled, however, as European governments prepare to strengthen their ties to China, and in turn abandon the United States.

In 1989 the United States along with European governments imposed an arms embargo on China as a result of the massacre in Tiananmen Square. This embargo has been in place ever since and has hampered Chinese efforts to equip its revitalized military forces with the latest technology. European countries have recently declared their intention to end this embargo, however, effectively isolating the United States as the only western country to maintain the line.

Even though Europe often holds itself out as the humanitarian conscience of the world - in contrast to those ?cowboy? Americans - this new plan to lift the embargo will effectively end the consequences levied on China for committing one of the worst single-event atrocities of the last century. Sound hypocritical (Europeans prefer the term ?nuanced?)? Maybe, but most in Europe feel the stakes are just too high to hold China?s feet to the human rights fire.

The EU has been building closer relations with China for some time because of the incredible economic opportunities present there. European efforts have been largely successful as it recently has emerged that the EU is now China?s largest trading partner. In 2004, trade between the two reached the level of 160 billion euros, a jump of 35% over the previous year. These kinds of statistics are causing Europe to ditch the human rights rhetoric, and risk offending Washington when it comes to dealing with Beijing.

Aside from just economic opportunity, some in Europe also see political dividends in building a stronger Sino-European connection. France?s Jacque Chirac on a recent visit there emphasized a growing convergence of opinion between Europe and China on foreign affairs stating that they shared ?a common vision of the world ? a multipolar world.? This was a clear reference to the fact that many within Europe view a stronger relationship with China as a way of offsetting or even undermining American hegemony in world affairs. One expert quoted in a recent article appearing in the Economist stated that China and Europe represent an emerging ?axis? whose political aim is to contain American power.

Building a closer relationship with China thus contains numerous strategic and economic benefits for Europe. China represents another area in the world in which the interests of the EU are now significantly different or even at odds with those of the US. It is also another example of the European willingness to embarrass and abandon its American ?ally? to follow its own course.

Originally Posted by Sabinus Invictus

This article posted here for educational and discussion purposes only:

Eye On Europe

Europe?s China Connection

Recently transatlantic relations between the US and Europe appear to have been improving. A conciliatory tone from the Bush administration has been met with receptive ears in European capitals as they prepare to receive the American President in February. This new, upbeat mood about the relationship between America and Europe may be soon spoiled, however, as European governments prepare to strengthen their ties to China, and in turn abandon the United States . . .

Titus,

Where did this article come from?

If it is factually correct, it is disturbing and shows great short-sightedness on the part of Europe. Sometimes they do remind me of "the Colonies" in the old Battlestar Galactica series. Somehow I see France behind this. Perfidious Gaul.

But I suspect as the world A) comes to realize the menace China can/will be, B) EuroBoomers come more into power, and C) America's Overconsumption Crash renders us less of a threatening competitor to Europe, I think the Europeans will change their tune.

Originally Posted by Peter Gibbons

Somehow I see France behind this. Perfidious Gaul.

How did you guess? :wink: See below.

Aside from just economic opportunity, some in Europe also see political dividends in building a stronger Sino-European connection. France?s Jacque Chirac on a recent visit there emphasized a growing convergence of opinion between Europe and China on foreign affairs stating that they shared ?a common vision of the world ? a multipolar world.? This was a clear reference to the fact that many within Europe view a stronger relationship with China as a way of offsetting or even undermining American hegemony in world affairs. One expert quoted in a recent article appearing in the Economist stated that China and Europe represent an emerging ?axis? whose political aim is to contain American power.

BTW, speaking of 'perfidious Gaul', it's not the first time that France has betrayed the rest of the Western World, either. Back during the early to mid 1500s, when the Ottoman Turks looked like they might well succeed in conquering and forcibly Islamicising Europe, France contracted an informal alliance with the Ottomans, such that the ports of the French Riviera were opened for use by the Ottoman Fleet. That informal alliance remained in place for the next century and a half - until it became clear that the Ottomans were in decline, which diminished their worth as a potential ally to France - against their fellow Westerners. :evil:

Unfortunately for France this time around, I've learned from another website that China may not be as keen for such an alliance as France, as China sees both the US and the EU as standing in the way of whatever long-range plans they have for the future.

Likely overall result: The two halves of the Western World may well be compelled to face what will eventually develop into the greatest threat to their very existence since the Ottoman Empire separately - and further weakened by the mutual distrust and hostility which will most probably have become a chronic condition between them by the end of this decade.

As the French and the Celestials have the best cuisines in the world it is natural they would have an antipathy to the merchants of Taco Bell and Dunkin' Donuts.

tripes a la mode de Caen and civet cat



I have tasted the future and it is decidedly odd. :arrow: :arrow: :arrow:

Originally Posted by Peter Gibbons

If it is factually correct, it is disturbing and shows great short-sightedness on the part of Europe. Sometimes they do remind me of "the Colonies" in the old Battlestar Galactica series.

Good comparison... with Chirac as the 'old' Baltar, leading the rest of his people to destruction for the sake of his own personal agenda.

Speaking of the old Battlestar Galactica series, for a very long time, every time the Dems opened their mouths on the subject of defense and/or foreign policy, they tended to remind me of Sire Uri giving that mealy-mouth speech on Carillon, advocating unilateral disarmament (to prove our good intentions and change of heart to the Cylons). Not to mention his earlier claim that the Cylons were justly provoked by Colonial foreign policy, and were thus completely justified in their subsequent actions.

Originally Posted by Sabinus Invictus

Originally Posted by Peter Gibbons

If it is factually correct, it is disturbing and shows great short-sightedness on the part of Europe. Sometimes they do remind me of "the Colonies" in the old Battlestar Galactica series.

Good comparison... with Chirac as the 'old' Baltar, leading the rest of his people to destruction for the sake of his own personal agenda.

Speaking of the old Battlestar Galactica series, for a very long time, every time the Dems opened their mouths on the subject of defense and/or foreign policy, they tended to remind me of Sire Uri giving that mealy-mouth speech on Carillon, advocating unilateral disarmament (to prove our good intentions and change of heart to the Cylons). Not to mention his earlier claim that the Cylons were justly provoked by Colonial foreign policy, and were thus completely justified in their subsequent actions.

Exactly what triggered the connection.

BTW (though this is the wrong thread for this) have you seen the new series? It's AWESOME.