Comments by Nairb

Comment #296790 by Nairb on December 4, 2008 at 4:22 am

Bernstein

In "supporting" gays right to mariage - there are different levels.

1.Intellectually ( but doing nothing)
2.Intellectually ( but doing anonymous things to support it such as voting, if you were in the voting booth)
3.Speaking out for it privately occasionally
4. Campainging (ie giving it a priority bo0ver other issues)

On the scale of 1 to 4 above , which is it?
It sounds like you would do 1,2,3 but not 4?

2. The Religion of Peace Strikes Again

Comment #296750 by Nairb on December 4, 2008 at 3:03 am

Matthai

Acts of defense are appropriate. Proportional responses are appropriate. Obliterating the infrastructure of part of a country is not proportianate to a kidnapping.

One can say that while supporting the existance and well being of israel. Many israelis have said this.

3. The Religion of Peace Strikes Again

Comment #296732 by Nairb on December 4, 2008 at 2:35 am

Brian
Agreed.

Steve
Thats pretty clear and reasonable.

Bernstein, care to clarify your position?

4. The Religion of Peace Strikes Again

Comment #296723 by Nairb on December 4, 2008 at 2:24 am

Perhaps I am misreading this but here is my take.

Bernstein
If you say gay marriage basterdizes marriage then that is stupid.
If you say you couldnt vote to support equal rights then that is also stupid
If you say you couldnt support gay rights because you find the act disgusting then that is also indefensible ( because irrational)
If you say that Gay rights are important but not enough for you to drive 2 hours and take part in a campaign then I can understand. Though I would say it could be argued its an immoral decision if you spend the time watching the match on tv. We all prioritize our life. Perhaps in a 100 years we will all be considered brutish pigs for not very actively supporting (intelligent) animal rights, aboriginal rights, democratic rights in saudia arabia etc

I think also there may be a cultural issue here.
In some countries we have instituted a legal equivalent to marriage for everyone (pax in France). It solves practical issues while artfully (cowardly) dodging the battle about the sacred cow "marriage".
I havent heard too many complaints about this from gays.
Maybe in some societies gays care less about how people view them.

In other more religous societies I can understand how being athiest is probably more acceptable then being gay. Some people may fear being seen as gay to the extent that will not even support gay rights. In such a case to be honest if we act like that then we are cowards in such circumstances. But who has never been a coward?

Bernstein , perhaps people would be less angry/abusive with you if you clarified your position and motives.

5. The Religion of Peace Strikes Again

Comment #296409 by Nairb on December 3, 2008 at 2:07 pm

"That IS interesting, Nairb. Perhaps tracking down the supplier for the Palestinian ordnance might be worth looking into. "

Colwyn
:-) Sounds like you know the answer - do tell.

I heard that these qassam rockets are about as a accurate as a paper plane carrying enough firepower to make you wobble on your bicycle.

6. The Religion of Peace Strikes Again

Comment #296389 by Nairb on December 3, 2008 at 1:51 pm

Al

I know what you mean. Israel has the right to defend its citizens.
However I think they seem to over react- look at the numbers on artillery if not casualties.

Actually I think they are overrreacting because the effect I mentioned has already begun - because Israel (like palestine) are becoming increasingly rigid politically due to the growing influece of fundamentalists and their baby power.

I think your "solution" is a good one except for the consequences if the Palestinians dont stop violence.

For the violence to stop you need a strong Palestinian state and I dont think we are going to see one unless Europe, US, Israel encourages one strongly (with money and political support).

With Bush that was out of the question. With Obama it has a chance, but just a chance.

7. The Religion of Peace Strikes Again

Comment #296364 by Nairb on December 3, 2008 at 1:36 pm

"the very idea of a nation state in this part of the world has been decling over the last 50 years."

Al
This is true. Germany or France are about as likely to invade UK as Massachussets is to invade Rhode Island.A huge amount of everyday law is European and people can national challenge laws against the European constitutional court.

The point of the EU was to stop all wars. And despite everyone moaning about the EU that has been one of its grat successes.
Another has been helping Ireland to be an economic Tiger. Which did help in bringing peace to Northern Ireland.

When people have access to a bright future , they are less likely to sign up into a thuggish organisation like the IRA (or Hamas for that matter).

8. The Religion of Peace Strikes Again

Comment #296357 by Nairb on December 3, 2008 at 1:25 pm

To sum up I think
Palestinians are losing very badly - like 10 to 1 on casualties
The Intifada violence is over
The Palestinian resistance is turning to faction fighting.

I think its hard for Israel to continue to justify a hardline based on these figures.

Its time for Israel to propose a juist peace , probably along line you mentioned Al.

Overall I think there is alot of propaganda on both sides. Nobody is pure white here. However the power and money and political clout is on the Israeli side. Its up to them.

And if they dont go for peace now, probably in another generation the fundies in Israel (who really do have 6 children) are going to be in power , with Hamas equivalents on the other side.

Then it will be a real mess.

9. The Religion of Peace Strikes Again

Comment #296343 by Nairb on December 3, 2008 at 1:13 pm

Some more interesting points

During 2006, Israeli Security Forces fired some 14,000 artillery shells into the Gaza Strip which were responsible for killing 59 persons, almost all of them civilians. 14 In November 2006, the Government of Israel placed a moratorium on the use of artillery fire, contributing to a significant reduction of civilian deaths in 2007.

More than twice as many Palestinians were killed by other Palestinians (415) in 2007 as were killed by Israelis (185).

The number of Israeli civilians killed, from attacks by Palestinian armed groups or individuals, has declined steadily, peaking in 2002 at an average of 22 deaths per month, and dropping markedly to an average of one civilian per month in 2007. 6/

In contrast to Israeli figures, however, Palestinian civilian fatalities have remained high. Palestinian civilians, killed by Israeli security forces, peaked with an average of 35 deaths per month in 2002, and again in 2004. In 2007 they dropped slightly to an average of ten civilian deaths per month.

10. The Religion of Peace Strikes Again

Comment #296324 by Nairb on December 3, 2008 at 12:47 pm

Well I looked it up. Its very interesting reading.
Here is a good link for those interested

http://domino.un.org/UNISPAL.NSF/d9d90d845776b7af85256d08006f3ae9/be07c80cda4579468525734800500272!OpenDocument

Havent read it all yet but heres a snippet or two -

In contrast the total number of Palestinians, both civilians and combatants killed by the Israeli security forces or Israeli individuals, remains relatively high. In 2007, for example, for every one Israeli death there were 25 Palestinian deaths compared to 2002 when the ratio was 1:2.5.

11 Israeli civilians, including four children, have died since 2004, from the 2,696 Qassam rockets fired by Palestinian armed groups from the Gaza Strip into nearby Israeli towns,

11. The Religion of Peace Strikes Again

Comment #296314 by Nairb on December 3, 2008 at 12:39 pm

But when rockets are raining down in my city,

I often wonder about who is beeing agressive here.
For sure Israel is under terrorist attack and we should support them.But what is the scale of the attack and the retaliation.

Are there any statistics on the number of Israeli citizens injured or killed. Or the number of rockets landing in Israel and their firepower.

The impression I have got from people in the area was that Israel was not "losing" in the body count.

Also it would be interesting to compare in magnitude to NI.

12. The Religion of Peace Strikes Again

Comment #295567 by Nairb on December 2, 2008 at 12:28 pm

Al

You are be right in patches, but I think you see things too much in black and white.

You cant say all muslims have gone backward.
Think of Morocco, Tunisia, Turkey, Indonesia.
What about Iran before the Ayatollah.
What about Iraq before Saddam.
What about Lebannon up to the 70s.

All of these have muslim majorities.

Was it Kissinger who said that muslims countries are as homogeneous as christian ones.

13. The Religion of Peace Strikes Again

Comment #295451 by Nairb on December 2, 2008 at 7:39 am

Al

I agree with most of your legal based approach as you already know.

However I am not convinced that the jihadists are so different to the IRA or the Basques etc. Ask the spainish what they think of this. I am not sure if they would see such a huge difference (on the train bombing in Madrid , there was general belief this was due to Basques).

Ask Ian Paisley's followers in Northern Ireland if the IRA were easy and not out to destroy British society there. You might get an earful :-)

I am less concerned about Hamas charter then their willingness to negotiate or achieve a settlement. The IRA had the objective of a socialist state and Irish republic (ie British out). They still negotiated and disarmed.

14. Vatican thanks Muslims for returning God to Europe

Comment #295355 by Nairb on December 2, 2008 at 5:30 am

The "return of God" is clearly seen in Tauran's native France, where Europe's largest Muslim minority has brought faith questions such as women's headscarves into the political debate after decades when they were considered strictly private issues.

Speaking of France, Yes, thanks for allowing the secular state to clarify its intent.

Before, headscarves were outlawed but schools could decide on how strictly to apply the rule aginst religous symbols.Now there is a specific law excluding religous symbols with a clear rule on consequences.

Of the millions of students in school, there is usually issues with this from 10s or low 100s of students per year.

Not exactly a critical issue for a state or a student - despite its worldwide mediatisation.

However it was a nice wakeup call. This year a new addition was made to the curriculum - all primary school students must learn about the holocaust and its impacts on children...
My sons class have been reading and studying Anne Franck.

15. The Religion of Peace Strikes Again

Comment #295171 by Nairb on December 1, 2008 at 11:44 pm

Titania
Me and Al go round and round on this one.
Here is my talke on the situation.

I think this is a systematic process like a negative feedback loop.
The more negative feedback is given to the the subpopulation/minority the more the move to the extreme either tolerating or supporting th real extremists.

The IRA and Basques have come to the table, but not while they were being condemned or ostracised.

The governments need to take an absolute straight transpartent and firm line on extremists.
However their only hope is to reach out to the majority and integrate them into society.
This can be done through education ( no seperate schools ), immigration policy, anti discrimination laws and ideally ensuring the right message is sent by the government (like not Fitna).

At the same time the state needs to be shown to be absolutely impartial. No paralell law systems I believe would help. Absolute intolerance of genital mutilation , violence or discrmination against women would help also. Teaching of responsability to buy into democratic rights and responsabilities..

Many or all of the above have recently been initiated by western countries.

The bottom line I think is by making the majority feel at home and having a feeling of belonging (ie not on the defensive and not paranoid) you cut the ground from under the extremists.

This isnt going to happen overnight. It will probably take a generation ( if its not slowed down by overreactions).

At an international level if people were really serious they would tell(not ask) Saudia Arabia to stop funding any religous preaching in western countries.

16. The Religion of Peace Strikes Again

Comment #294904 by Nairb on December 1, 2008 at 1:57 pm

A series of events have led some muslims to take up a violent approach as revolutionaries. Now we have to deal with this extremism as we have dealt with it elsewhere.

For better or worse I dont expect muslims to out their own. People said the same to the basques and the irish and the corsicans and algerians.
Never did their community push them out. In fact the opposite occurred. The greater the ostracisation of the general population for not turning in their own violent members, the more the population sided with the extremists.

In fact I'm hard put to think of a single community ever outing its own in such circumstances.

If we want to tackle muslim extremism, I think we need to learn from what has worked in the past aainst other such extremists.

17. The Religion of Peace Strikes Again

Comment #294868 by Nairb on December 1, 2008 at 1:14 pm

Skepticato

I know how you feel. I was in some nearby hotels in Mumbai just the week before.
People are still a little shocked so its probably best to take out your emotion on some of the people here.
Then when this starts to be a more distant memory you can start putting your views on the table to those around you.

The religous are infected with a meme that takes a lot to get rid of.

18. Hitchens Debates Rabbi Wolpe on God

Comment #293975 by Nairb on November 30, 2008 at 12:48 pm

Decius

Great picture.Do you have a link to the story?.

Also how do you insert pictures like this? Can you cut and paste or do you have to link to the original image?

19. Hitchens Debates Rabbi Wolpe on God

Comment #293960 by Nairb on November 30, 2008 at 12:24 pm

Titania

Would love to come. Hard for me to commit to anything outside usual holidays but I am watching the date.

20. Hitchens Debates Rabbi Wolpe on God

Comment #293913 by Nairb on November 30, 2008 at 10:56 am

Dianelos

On the contrary I see some historical evidence against such problems going away - namely that for the last 100 years or so scientific discoveries have produced increasing trouble for ontological naturalism

This is a normal part of scientific discovery. As we improve our models our understanding, new questions will be created. Its not a "trouble".
In fact scientists are delighted to find a new problem to attack and solve. They dont feel threatened like religous people do because they set out to discover. They dont pretend to know the answers. They dont pretend because it is less satisfying then getting the real answer. And they will get the real answer because the scientific method is the toolbox to do so. Religion has no toolbox and therefore after its creation is ossified and contributes nothing.

21. Hitchens Debates Rabbi Wolpe on God

Comment #293909 by Nairb on November 30, 2008 at 10:54 am

Dianelos

After all religion has always been intimately related to the advancement of ethics

In practical reality? I haven't noticed. Stone the adulterer or burn in hell the sinner is what I have noticed. Stone age ethics preserved after its sell by date by a pompous unthinking religous elite.
Have you noticed religous attitudes to women, other religions, other cultures, gays, atheists. And you dare say religion advances ethics?

22. Hitchens Debates Rabbi Wolpe on God

Comment #293761 by Nairb on November 30, 2008 at 3:50 am

Comment #292907 by Dianelos Georgoudis on November 28

My own judgment about this issue is this: The apparent fine-tuning of the fundamental constants will probably not go away and does count as evidence for God because it makes the existence of God more probable. On the other hand it is also weak evidence not by itself sufficient to convince one of the existence of God (or more generally that the fundamental nature of reality is the mind and not matter.) But the intelligence and beauty implicit in the discoveries of science might! :-)

Dianelos
Beauty can convince you to do many things for simple biological reasons. The beauty of green countryside doesnt count as evidence of anything else though.

Your so called unsolvable mystery of "Fine tuning" will go away. There is overwhelming evidence of this.
Throughout history science has increased our understanding of the world.
Religion has consistently retreated to the edge of our understanding. This is the only place it can safely hide. This is why religion never contributes anything new to our knowledge.
The universal constants are just Religions temporary pit stop on its never ending flight from scientific knowledge.

Not so long ago God/religion was hiding in the thunder and in the strange sounds of the night. It hid in "universal constants" like the position of stars and the seasons.
Now it hides at the edge of the universe.

The fact that religion/god has to continually run and hide at the edge of our knowledge like this shows by your argument (but contrary to your conclusion) the existance of God is becoming less and less probable all the time.

23. Hitchens Debates Rabbi Wolpe on God

Comment #292546 by Nairb on November 28, 2008 at 12:21 am

Steve
Look forward to reading it.

Mark Jones
I think we should investigate this "poor tuning" that Hitchens refers to. Its intolerable that the universe could be indifferent to us.

24. Hitchens Debates Rabbi Wolpe on God

Comment #292432 by Nairb on November 27, 2008 at 4:11 pm

Steve

This "fine tuning" really gets me irritated. Have a look/read of Carl Sagans Pale Blue dot excerpt or some hubble ultra deep field pictures and the "fine tuning" seems like a really really stupid joke.(You know this better then most)

I am reasonably relaxed to concede ground to a good argument. I think there is a tremendous amount of things to investigate here and there are lots of good reasons to do so but "a fine tuning explaination" is not one of them.

Do you disagree with this excerpt you quoted only or my general comment that classifying universes according to existance of life is a little pretentionious for a microscopic dot on a microscopic dot on a microscopic dot on a microscopic dot?

I think there is a real problem with attitude when it comes to "fine tuning". It is the logical fallacy of "argument from consequences". Sometimes we try and dismiss the fact that there is anything worth investigating because it appears to concede ground to theists.

I agree.I think "fine tuning" is framing the investigation. When in reality there is no reason to frame it this way. This seems like manipulation to me. I want to dismiss the way this is framed not the open minded investigation of how the fundamental constants happen to be the way they are. However this is not "why" question.

25. Hitchens Debates Rabbi Wolpe on God

Comment #292310 by Nairb on November 27, 2008 at 1:06 pm

God fearing Atheist said:
It is too easy to say that "we only observe the universe we observe, because the dice came up with a set of numbers that allowed us to exist". A more satisfying answer would be to derive the constants from a more fundimental (smaller) set.

GFA

I suppose I resent the fact (the naivete?) that this should be satisfying. Millions of people die of hunger. Since when is the universe "satisfying"?
Looking for an "explaination" for why the universe is "fine tuned" to allow creation of life reminds me of the story that plants are green to sooth our eyes. It seems like the height of arrogance.

From a "universe point of view" life is just one of very many entirely irrelevant "weird phenomenon". There would probably be many "weird phenomeneon" in many possible universes over 15 billion years and in a space of 50? billion light years in radius.
Whats so special about us as a "weird phenomenon"?
(rant is not directed at anyone)

PS : Perhaps we should study "why" the universal constanst allowed the creation of bad coffee too!

26. Hitchens Debates Rabbi Wolpe on God

Comment #292273 by Nairb on November 27, 2008 at 10:11 am

Roger

I think you are right.
It makes me wonder to what extent they are believers and to what extent they are simply propagandists.

( Its a behavious which is not limited to the religous either)

27. Hitchens Debates Rabbi Wolpe on God

Comment #292267 by Nairb on November 27, 2008 at 10:02 am

Dianelos said :

Having said that I understand that the Christian-speak about God sending His Son to be sacrificed is easy to misunderstand. But the "Son" is not a separate person from God; rather the "Son" stands for the second hypostasis of the Trinity which represents the active principle of God's nature, the expression of His/Her will. (Now I can imagine the above may sound terrible opaque.

:-)

Bonzai said:
Dianelos is full of shit.

Enough said.

28. ELECTION DAY IN THE USA. GO VOTE.

Comment #280508 by Nairb on November 7, 2008 at 4:25 pm

Yes actually fairness is a characteristic of capitalism. The free market is not sexist, racist, or prejudice about anything. The free market only cares about what you have to offer.

DP

You have a point here. I agree free markets have helped create a more level playing field a more accesible market for many things.
This has been good for the consumer.

But its not all positive. Lets take the free market in company shares.Have you notice that the people wh get burnt the most in a crash is the small shareholder.
Why is that , well because insider knowledge either legally or illegally is available for the big shareholder.
This is not a level playing field.

In any case whatever about the systems processes the point I made on fairness (or lack of it) is on outcomes.

If 50% of the wealth is concentrated in the top 1% or 5% there is something fundamentally wrong.
I am all for merit being compensated but not in factors of 100s or 1000s compared to other human beings.

29. ELECTION DAY IN THE USA. GO VOTE.

Comment #280492 by Nairb on November 7, 2008 at 3:40 pm

Gregg
Havent seen his views. But the idea of card game with made up rules isnt too far away from how I see it.
I do believe that capitalism does provide a basis for a workable economic system though. So I dont see it as totally artificial.

30. ELECTION DAY IN THE USA. GO VOTE.

Comment #280486 by Nairb on November 7, 2008 at 3:34 pm

D'arcy

I think we are saying the same thing.

I meant Capitalism can and does lead to an unfair outcome. So it needs regulation to ensure we all profit from what is an efficient wealth creation mechanism (but not a distribution mechanism).

31. Does Religion Make You Nice?

Comment #280482 by Nairb on November 7, 2008 at 3:23 pm

Caudimrdax,PeterMcKellar,

In france there is about 30% athiest 30% religous and 30% deist.
We dont do church rituals (<10%).

And I can confirm what any tourist to Paris knows - that we are all equally NOT NICE.

:-)

32. ELECTION DAY IN THE USA. GO VOTE.

Comment #280475 by Nairb on November 7, 2008 at 3:01 pm

Bonzai,Gregg

I hadnt noticed the Dear Leader part.
Perhaps I am wasting my breath.

DP
If you believe in equality then it is difficult to accept unlimited differences in wealth without some compensation for the losers.

This is the basis of civilisation and is part of our drive to improve the world around us.

Capitalism is an efficient game of wealth creation where we all gain but if its too asymetric then people (the overwhelming majority) are going to come and break the game.History has shown this time and again.

EDIT : The game only works if we accept the rules. The picture above is an example of what happens when fairness is not part of the rules. The People make up new rules which are distinctly unfavourable to the previous elite in power.
In the end fair rules are in everyones interests.

33. ELECTION DAY IN THE USA. GO VOTE.

Comment #280435 by Nairb on November 7, 2008 at 2:06 pm

DP

I agree that there is a knock on wage inflation. And that wage inflation can cause product price inflation
This in turn causes people to fall into poverty... creating a need for minimu wage.

This looks like a 100% feedback loop.
However it isn't - simply because if it was then raising minimum wage would simply cause everything to go up (wages, and profits proportionally). So no impact on anyone.
This doesnt happen. So its not a 100% feedback loop.

It has a positive impact on the poorest 10% and a much smaller effect on th rest of the population and economy in general.

And thats what we want.Because over time capitalism stretches the difference between poor and rich.

Check out wealth distribution over the past 30 years if in doubt.The rich (top 1%) have been getting richer and the poor poorer. Middle class is where it was 30 years ago ( basically they have been screwed by the very rich)

34. ELECTION DAY IN THE USA. GO VOTE.

Comment #280412 by Nairb on November 7, 2008 at 1:27 pm

DP,

Raising the wage happens every year here. It is index linked to inflation and goes up by about 1% per year. Prices are significantly lower then UK.

Having a minimum wage and welfare level allows people to live decently. Its a safety net. Now of course that does not mean we should raise it to 100K per year.
The purpose is to manage extremes.

The economy behaves in a systematic fashion. I mean its outputs feed back in a loop to its inputs. So hiking wages can have impacts on inputs (eg products) but its not obvious how when you only raise the wage of the poorest.

In the end the economy is there to serve the people not the other way round. The Equality we demand in the constitution does constrain the economic systems people will accept.

35. ELECTION DAY IN THE USA. GO VOTE.

Comment #280407 by Nairb on November 7, 2008 at 1:15 pm

Hungarian Elephant

I think I preferred your old avatar. It was abit more cheerful. Please , I am sure holloween is over, even in Ireland.

EDIT : PS maybe you have been too busy!

36. ELECTION DAY IN THE USA. GO VOTE.

Comment #278832 by Nairb on November 5, 2008 at 9:31 am

Al

If it makes you feel better - its the same elsewhere.

Last time but one we got tochose between a
1. Extreme right Holocaust denier who engourages non pure french to go home (lepen)
2. A Lifetime crook and politician, megalomaniac (chirac)

Unlike Palin both were smart.
And thats whats scary

If Palin had been a super intelligent religous maniac - would McCain be president now?

I am glad she was dumb.

37. Beware - creationism's march will go on

Comment #276661 by Nairb on November 2, 2008 at 10:17 am

Maybe in a generation's time, Americans will patronise Europeans as quasi-fascist bigots. If we are to avoid their condescension, we must accept ....

So if we dont do X the end is nigh? Hmmm, this argument sounds familiar.

What is the link between creationism and Turkeys defamation laws? None.
What % of the population is creationist in Europe? 1%?
What is its growth rate ? No evidence.

And of course there are no quasi-fascist bigots right now in our midst living like parasites by stirring up the latest fashionable fears.

38. Teaching hate in UK schools

Comment #276654 by Nairb on November 2, 2008 at 9:39 am

Vinelectric

It would be interesting to know what are the references to apes and pigs in the Koran and Hadith.

I read somewhere there was only one in the Koran but many in the hadith.

Also how much attention is given to these parts in muslim countries educational sylabuses.
I presume, Turkey, Morocco, tunisia, algeria such teaching is not the norm. But does anyone know?

39. Teaching hate in UK schools

Comment #276626 by Nairb on November 2, 2008 at 6:14 am

Does anyone know what is the origin of this Apes and Pigs thing?

I dug this up from the internet. I understand it is part of the koran.

Some of the Jews warned the sinners that Allah would punish them. When the latter refused to stop, they separated themselves from the sinners with a wall. One day, the sinners were not seen leaving their gate. When those who observed the divine precept climbed the wall and opened the doors of the locked houses they found that all men, women, and children had turned into apes.(9) According to some commentators, the young people among the sinners became apes, while the elderly became pigs.(10)

While repulsive I can easily imagine reading it in the old testament.

What the school is doing is unacceptable.
These schoolbooks should be banned. (particularly in britain where the story of the 3 pigs is restricted! )
Its incitement to hatred.

However this seems to be a specific issue with wahabi teaching and emphasis rather then islam itself.

40. Teaching hate in UK schools

Comment #276114 by Nairb on November 1, 2008 at 10:40 am

MPhil

I am going to look up Rawls.

For sure the solution (communism) and the practical way they went about creating a communist society was disastrous.

But didnt Marx realise that capitalism was inherently unstable? And that it would concentrate wealth to a greater and greater extent amongst the few. There seems to be reasonable evidence that he was right about both of these failings of capitalism.

It would be nice if there was anything of value in his thinking behind this analysis. Not to rehabilitate Marx but to improve capitalism.

These failings have been waved away too long by economists with "the invisible steadying hand of the market". Seems our economic theory has been as firmly grounded as our "invisible friend" beliefs.

To me that is more scary then any religous nut.

41. Teaching hate in UK schools

Comment #276084 by Nairb on November 1, 2008 at 9:04 am

119. Comment #275971 by Goldy
A friend of mine, an Iranian lass in the UK, told me I should hear the Koran read in Arabic as it was so beautiful. I told her she should hear Beowulf in Old English - the beauty is the same. As is the comprehension. She understood me :-)

Goldy

It always makes me laugh when I hear some literary minded person say

"xxx is such a beautiful language" As if others are not "beautiful"

*sigh : You would think people would understand that beauty is in the eye of the beholder

42. Teaching hate in UK schools

Comment #276083 by Nairb on November 1, 2008 at 8:58 am

134. Comment #276062 by MPhil
MPhil

Good article.

Now that the instability of "laissez faire" globalisation has been brought home to the west, its maybe a timely moment to look at Marx philosophy to see if anything in it can be used to create a stable, fairer and prosperous society .

Do you see anything?

For sure capitalism is an excellent system (based to some extent on greed). Globalisation has had a hugely positive effect in raising standards of living around the world.

However right now its becoming clear that global controls are lacking and global economic governance badly needed to restabilize the global market.
Perhaps more fundamentally, people the world over are asking what real value are these financiers adding to the real world for their huge pay packets.

It does look like a little like poker players earning a living from more and more complex betting strategies.
Should we close the casino or ban poker orjust give them a talking to?

43. Free to Think for Themselves

Comment #268940 by Nairb on October 22, 2008 at 12:49 pm

H4D,
Just read your essay,Well done! Straight talk is a lot easier to read. Now I have to read him myself to see what he was on about!

Nairb

44. Free to Think for Themselves

Comment #268911 by Nairb on October 22, 2008 at 12:12 pm

H4D

To hopefully redeem Rousseau, Rousseau's Social contract I think has relevant things to say on the freedom/equality conflict we see here on this thread.

According to Rousseau, by joining together into civil society through the social contract and abandoning their claims of natural right, individuals can both preserve themselves and remain free. This is because submission to the authority of the general will of the people as a whole guarantees individuals against being subordinated to the wills of others and also ensures that they obey themselves because they are, collectively, the authors of the law.

45. Free to Think for Themselves

Comment #268903 by Nairb on October 22, 2008 at 11:56 am

Steve

I agree with your point that the law should be the basis of any arbitration.

If the problem that arbitration addresses is the inaccessability to the law due to costs and delays and formality then this problem would best be adressed directly.

Easily accessible Arbitration courts with legally educated people in charge would be the solution. These should be run by govt or at least validated by govt based on rational principles.

In the 21st century, due to social constraints, people using silly arbitration rules (ok'd by govt) is really a scandal.

46. Free to Think for Themselves

Comment #268851 by Nairb on October 22, 2008 at 10:49 am

Pbum, HungarianElephant

I know you are tired of fighting this argument.

But, I dont think you have fully considered my point.
Govt has a duty to ensure all citizens are treated equally - hence its position in commercial and employment law.
There is no fundamental reason to not extend it to arbitration.

If you agree with me , we can end the argument now !
:-)

EDIT PS : This need not change the way individuals reach their own agreements privately , but ensures arbitration doesnt open the door to anything while sanctioning it with an institution like structure with legal but unfair contracts being created from an unfair playing field.

This unfair playing field is prohibited amongst companies why should it be allowed in arbitration?

47. Free to Think for Themselves

Comment #268849 by Nairb on October 22, 2008 at 10:42 am

H4D

I didnt know you had posted your doc. Thanks! I di ask to read it when you are done. Rousseau is seen amongst some here as one of "fathers of the revolution" for his support of equality. Voltaire for freedom.

I agree its very interesting to see the thinking going into the structuring of society at that time.
Also the international nature of it with british, french and american influences coming together. Jefferson and Lafayette had an influence on the French constitution.

48. Free to Think for Themselves

Comment #268194 by Nairb on October 21, 2008 at 1:56 pm

Pbum
Ok I dont agreee with you but i understand your view.
Gotta stop now but i am using the analogy differently.

For me an employee choses an employer
in the same way a plaidant chooses an arbitration court

49. Free to Think for Themselves

Comment #268154 by Nairb on October 21, 2008 at 1:12 pm

To give a commercial analogy

If I as an individual publish a Call for tender for 1 year of accounting/legal work.
I publish the rules of response to the RFP
Included in the rules are:
1. Women lawyers will have half as long to present their proposal and service
2. Women lawyers will need to present twice as many client references
3. Women lawyers will need to accept 40% less pay for certain activities

Is this an acceptable RFP in a commercial environment. (We coulsd say - let the service providers decide or not if they wish to respond to the RFP)
Its not - because it is discriminatory.

An employment analogy
A company has two types of employment contracts , one for women , one for men.And publishes their approach
1. Women employees will have half as pay for certain work
2. Women employees will be 50% less likely to get a promotion
3. Women employees will have half importance as males in case of dispute

I think some government agencies will have something to say about this.
Yet nobody is OBLIGED to work for this company. There can be no unwilling victim.

The point is the government intervenes with laws in many areas to ensure equality.

50. Free to Think for Themselves

Comment #268138 by Nairb on October 21, 2008 at 12:53 pm

I have only argued for freedom for muslims (including muslim women

It is about establishing human rights within cultures ... And if that means imposing fairness, I say go for it.

Steve Pbum, Hungarian Elephant, H4d

This seems to be a conflict between Freedom and Equality.
This is the point I was trying to point to last night when evoking the French constitustion. (its similar to american and I am sure to any countries basic laws I imagine)

It says that peoples freedoms are only limited by the existance of other freedoms
And That the state is responsible to ensure this.
So when there is conflict between Freedom and Equality we need to limit peoples Freedom to ensure Equality for all.

To give examples
We are free to express ourselves. But we are not free to shout fire in a crowded cinema when there isnt one.
When should we limit peoples freedom. Well in a pragmnatic way. If we have strong evidence of discrimination or abuse of rights between people or companies in an area, then the government intervenes to impose equality/freedom.
Alternatively if it is patently NOT a level playing field, government intervenes to ensure fairness.
We see this in Commercial and employment law.
I dont see why this intervention/regulation should nmot be possible in Arbitration law.

People can still resolve differences as they wish. Provided there is some built in guarantees of fairness.
Also as Steve says fairness deferred is not fairness.

EDIT PS : Sharia based arbitration is not a level playing field for dispensing a Just dispute resolution