Re: Zionism | Pro and Con
Posted: Fri May 09, 2014 7:00 pm
Another day in the Universe
https://www.onthenatureofthings.net/forum/
https://www.onthenatureofthings.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=2782
Parodite wrote:HP... I'm not sure how to make you understand something very simple.
Take the general concept; a club, in the following sense:
To join or combine for a common purpose; form a club (free dictionary)
I think this concept is not too difficult to grasp. People form all kinds of clubs, for all kinds of reasons. From a gardening club... to religious clubs like the RCC, sports clubs, investment clubs. With a bit of a stretch, one could call a territory like a nation state also a club. To be a member means you are a citizen of that country.
But forget for the moment all the types of clubs that exist... and focus on the one thing that they all have in common: membership rules. All clubs have them. Would you agree with that, HP?
Do you at understand how clubs work, what membership means, that there exist membership rules? And guess what.. now comes the hard part that I would really like you to meditate on for a while... who make and maintain those membership rules?
Please think of any type of club... of the members of those clubs... and the membership rules that apply to that particular club. Again... who are making and maintaining those membership rules? Keep them sacred and unchanged, or change them when they feel like it?
I think and hope you will agree... that although there are tens of thousands of clubs in the world... they all have this part in common: it is club members themselves who decide on the membership rules. In other words: all clubs self-regulate.
This is true, right? We need some common ground here.
Of course.. we all only seek and accept membership of clubs that we like. And if other people than our adult individual selves made us member of clubs at very young age without asking us for permission first as happens often with religious clubs.. later in life we may decide to unilaterally excommunicate ourselves from such clubs when they don't give us what we want or need. (not all clubs accept such a unilateral move unfortunately; you might get killed)
Do you understand that most people, when they look at clubs in the world they would never wanna be part of even if membership were offered to them for free... simply shrug their shoulders and move on? Moving on because as a non-member there is nothing you can do about those membership rules anyways. You can think they are absurd, stink, are false, evil.... but your opinion doesn't do anything to change those membership rules or change how the club behaves in the wider world. It just should be a reason to be happy you're not member of that club.. or forced to be member.
Well, that last sentence is not quite true. In the case of the Jewish club there is something you can do. If you want them to be more Jewish than they already are... more married to their new territory in the Middle East... you should just keep delegitimizing their Jewishness (or the Jewishness of some their club members) and the country they now live in where they can defend themselves against fits of anti-Semitic violence. People like you HP, actually do them a great service!
I do understand this point of yours and will come back to it. It's a very important issue and a lot can be said about and around it.Heracleum Persicum wrote:Ashkenazim "Judaism-II" does not entitle them to claim Moses promised them Palestine .. true, bad things happened to them in their home country, true .. if they want a place of their own, Israel, they must ask the indigini, elbowing-in will lead to next disaster
Parodite wrote:I do understand this point of yours and will come back to it. It's a very important issue and a lot can be said about and around it.Heracleum Persicum wrote:Ashkenazim "Judaism-II" does not entitle them to claim Moses promised them Palestine .. true, bad things happened to them in their home country, true .. if they want a place of their own, Israel, they must ask the indigini, elbowing-in will lead to next disaster
But I'm not totally sure you understood really what I said about clubs and membership rules. In a nutshell what I'm saying is a principle that applies to all clubs:
Clubs make and break their own rules
You agree? Are we on the same page? I like to rant a bit more about this.
Club rules... and how you become a member.. are not engraved in stainless steel. They do change over time, they are not forever. And clubs themselves.. are not forever either. Some clubs and their rules included simply go extinct. Right?
But what remains true for as long a club exists.. is that they decide on their own club rules. They make them or break them if so they wish. It is totally their own business, the business of the club and members of that club. I think we indeed are on the same page in this, but it appears as if you do know this is true.. but can't accept somehow the consequences of this fact when we focus on a specific club: the Jew-club. So I'll spend some more time on this issue. This will be boring to those who understand all I say here is rather obvious. Mea culpa for that.
Again, and can't repeat it enough.. clubs make-and-break their own rules. To be a member of the RCC there are certain rules. You just can't wake up one sunny morning as a non-Catholic and announce the world you have become a Roman Catholic. Maybe in your own head you changed the membership rules of the RCC that deal with becoming a club member... and believe yourself that this legitimizes your claim that you now are a Roman Catholic.. but to the rest of the club members you are just a delusional wacko. Why a wacko? Because that is not how things work in the reality of clubs and their members. Roman Catholics don't care what non-Roman Catholics fabricate in their own minds on what is a Catholic, should be a Catholic and how one becomes or should become a member, or what brand of Catholic is more Catholic than another.
So.. it is totally irrelevant what outsiders think of a certain club, its rules, how it applies those rules, change them or not change their own rules... right?
To give an example. Let's say the RCC changes it membership rules. Those changed rules say that existing and new members of the RCC must participate in a ritual if they want to stay a member or become a new member. This new rules means that they:
1) eat a porridge on new years eve with the following ingredients: 1/2 liter of sour goat milk + the pulp of 1 Koran (if your kitchen blender can't handle a full Koran.. it is allowed to remove the covers first), then:
2) run 10 times around the St. Peter in Rome, then:
3) kiss the bare feet of the Pope 10x left foot and 10x right foot.. while receiving 50 cleansing lashes on your back with a whip.
4) The above however only applies to German Roman Catholics, as a retribution they for their sins committed in WW2.
5) One final addition that applies to all Roman Catholics world wide: everybody has to apply for citizenship of Vatican City. All applications will be considered. If you are granted this citizenship will allow your certain privileges, responsibilities and powers in your local RC community. (a final test however will have to be done to decide if you are worthy: standing on your head and drink 3 bottles of Holy Trinity wine within 5 minutes; this however should not be seen as a big hurdle given the traditional experiences in this field)
Now outsiders may wonder..."Holy Moses! Where is the time when Catholics were still real Catholics? Before madness took over the RCC? What the f*ck is happening there?? I liked those Catholics of version 1.1 (and some of version 1.2) much better!"
The point being here: as a non-Catholic your opinions and particular tastes don't matter. You are entitled to have them... of course. But what remains is the simple fact.. that clubs make or break, keep or change their own rules as they see fit.
Do you understand, HP, that it is up to Catholics themselves to decide what is, what constitutes a Catholic? What club rules apply? To become a member, stay a member, stop being a member? That it aint zero zill nill relevance nor effect what you.. as a non-Catholic think? Other than an opinion that expresses maybe that club such or such aint your cuppa tea... well.. in that case feel blessed nobody forces you to become a member.
Club rules can concern themselves with all kinds of stuff. They may say that only males can be members, or people with a certain hair color, that they ought to be born in Canada or forget about the whole thing... Lots of crazy stuff going on in clubs. But what still holds true is the same thing and my point:
It is club members who decide on what their club is about, what membership rules apply.. if they ought to be changed or not. Clubs always self-identify and self-regulate.
The Jew-club is no different, HP. They make, break, keep or change their own rules.. as they see fit. It is kind of endearing how much you care about that club and its rules... even though it is utterly useless since it is not your club.
Of course it can be interesting to study clubs, their evolution, rules, how they self-identify and self-regulate.. and of course what it is that this club does in life... how it defines itself, shapes them as a group and as individuals. You can study a club and at the same time suspend your personal opinion and tastes... since they ain't gonna matter anyways that's not difficult... unless you are a club member yourself.
I find the Jew-club and its evolution, its changes through history an interesting club to study, and I don't feel the need nor urge to judge them on how they organize and regulate their club. If one day they decide that all Iranians can apply for membership for free and without further ado... sure I would be surprised.. but who am I to care.. since it is no my club anyways, nor an Iranian so I will scratch my head for a moment and continue with my own life with polite indifference towards the Jew club. I would wish them well though.
Do you understand now that it is entirely up the Jew club.. who is / can become a member of their club? Whether it is native Hebrews that lived unbroken in Palestine...or included those living in Iran for centuries... and included north African Jews and those living in Spain and Portugal that got pushed around in Europe ending up in Poland?.. and included religious converts to Judaism with blond hair and blue eyes?
It is entirely up to the Jewish club HP.. who is and can become member. I think we not disagree on those basics.. but want to be absolutely sure of we really are... or not.
If we really do agree on those general principles that apply to any and all clubs in the world the Jew-club included... sure lets move on to your criticisms on Zionism, the state of Israel.
Typhoon wrote:Have to wonder who appointed Heracleum Persicutum Chief Rabbi.
.
“Donald Sterling: The white Jews, there’s white Jews and black Jews, do you understand?
V: And are the black Jews less than the white Jews?
Donald Sterling: A hundred percent, fifty, a hundred percent.
V: And is that right?
Donald Sterling: It isn’t a question – we don’t evaluate what’s right and wrong, we live in a society. We live in a culture. We have to live within that culture.”
.
lolTyphoon wrote:Have to wonder who appointed Heracleum Persicutum Chief Rabbi.
Parodite wrote:HP, I know habits die hard... but I do take it you got my point and agree: it does not matter what you, HP, think is a Jew, or a Jew of type a / b/ or c. What is a Jew is something not you decide on... but Jews themselves. It is totally irrelevant what you as a non-Jew think about it, because Jews don't consult non-Jews first before they have an opinion about themselves.
So believe me... if anyone here is interested in what is a Jew, what brands and varieties may exist... they will certainly not consult you and rather talk to Jews themselves.. or read what various Jewish sources say about it. I'm just speaking for myself here.. but I'm certainly not interested in your concoctions. So if you want to continue your out of focus rants here.. let me know when you are ready so we can focus on the next issue: Zionism and the state of Israel.
*******************************************************************************
Zionism and the state of Israel are certainly not things that only concerns Jews. What only concerns Jews is what they tell themselves when they look in the mirror.. as members of the Jew club. The state of Israel however, how it came into existence effected much more people, notably Arabs that lived in the same area that was called Palestine during the British Mandate after WW1. I give the mic to you, HP.
Parodite wrote:HP.. not so fast.. if you don't mind. We hardly recovered from the first part of this discussion about the Jew-club. Where the point was made and understood that it is up to Jews themselves to decide who is a Jew. This doesn't mean non-Jews should not have opinions (having opinions is everybody's birth right)... it only means that non-Jews and their opinions do not change any of the rules Jews themselves decide to apply nor change opinions Jews have about themselves or each other. As in any club, internal discussions, disagreements about rules and how the club projects itself into the future... occur and are a natural part of club life.
Sorry to again repeat this little obvious detail. Repeating the obvious however is sometimes necessary I believe; it helps to stay grounded in reality.
.
Parodite wrote:
To make it a more general and obvious point. For people to observe clubs of which they are not a member themselves... is like observing things that you cannot change much about. For instance, you can look at the moon and think what a boring white color it has. You'd rather the moon have a bit of a blue-ish glow and with an orange rim at the edges. That's a fine opinion and matter of taste. However, when grounded in reality you quickly realize that those opinions, tastes or hopes.. are useless beyond them merely being opinions, tastes or hopes.
The moon looks the way it looks, and is what it is. You then can do two things: never look at the moon again because it is such a disappointing object... or you just accept the moon for what it is.. maybe with more curiosity than before re-examine the thing. You then stop telling the moon what it should be according to you and instead... let the moon tell and reveal more about itself to you, if you are curious.
You cannot change much about the moon. No matter how much you yell at it. Now my point: history, the past is, like that moon.
It doesn't matter what you look at if it is of yesterday.. or gone long past thousands of years ago. It can tell you its story.. or part of it more likely.. and you may misinterpret things unintentionally... but you can never re-write it. The past.. is out of reach.
So before we look at the history of the state of Israel.. which is an interesting story no doubt.. it would seem a good thing if we could acknowledge the above truth. As with everything of the past... so are the events, the multiple causes that lead to the state of Israel.. out of our reach. You can allow, as best as you can, this history tell its story to you.. as incomplete it probably will be.... and decide it is a wonderful story... or rather a nightmare of sorts...just another bloody colonialist tale... or an act of liberation and justice... a prophecy come true...or just another raw bloody fight about territory of which there are thousands of more stories to tell... another tragedy to be added to the list.
Any of the above appeals to you? Well.. my point is not that one is better than the other.. but that they are ALL irrelevant... in the same sense as one cannot undo or rewrite any history... anything that is of yesterday. As with looking at the moon... as with having opinions about clubs you are not a member of.
Can you agree with all this as a first principle? (not saying or wanting to imply that history is not a great opportunity to learn.. and inform the present.. but we are not there yet..)
Stop right there, referee whistles!Heracleum Persicum wrote:Yes, the Hebrew tribe can decide who (according to Torah) is a Jew .. but not Ukrainian and Latvian and Estonian CONVERTS.
Parodite wrote:Stop right there, referee whistles!Heracleum Persicum wrote:Yes, the Hebrew tribe can decide who (according to Torah) is a Jew .. but not Ukrainian and Latvian and Estonian CONVERTS.
You are just expressing an opinion that is irrelevant. Maybe there are some Jews who agree with you.. mostly likely the majority will disagree... but in either or all cases it is not up to you, your opinion simply doesn't count. I explained why this is so... taking quite some time ranting about club life, club rules.. members versus non members. Only club members make or break their own club rules.. not up to you. You have agreed to what I said... so when you say you agree I believe you know yourself what you are agreeing to. It doesn't follow from what you write that you understand and agree...
No sir.. your analogy is just another sad and well known reflex of changing the subject.Heracleum Persicum wrote:Parodite wrote:[...]Heracleum Persicum wrote:Yes, the Hebrew tribe can decide who (according to Torah) is a Jew .. but not Ukrainian and Latvian and Estonian CONVERTS.
Parodite, an analogy should help understand what we talking
Parodite wrote:.
Do you understand that it is not up to you to decide who is a Jew and what Jew-club rules apply ? It is really a primary school issue every child can understand. Do you understand it, YES or NO, HP. If you don't get it.. or not agree.. then be specific and not just change the subject. Can you do that? I still believe in you.
.
Ok, thanks. Wasn't sure if we agreed on that point, but indeed it seems we do. Club rules are for club members. Opinions are for free and for everybody Great!Heracleum Persicum wrote:Whether Azari thinks it is up to Azari or not to Azari "who is a Jew and what Jew-club rules apply ?" does not matter
Parodite wrote:.
.. there was the other point that I made, which is a simple primary school issue as well: we cannot change what happened in the past. Are you fully aware of that too? And understand the implications ?
Yes/No...
I mean the past.. in absolute and total sense. From 5 million years ago... to a second ago. I agree, things still unfolding... and when you look behind you, you can see where you came from, a backward view of your unfolding journey and landscape you move in:Heracleum Persicum wrote:Parodite wrote:.
.. there was the other point that I made, which is a simple primary school issue as well: we cannot change what happened in the past. Are you fully aware of that too? And understand the implications ?
Yes/No...
Depends what you mean by "PAST"
My question is then: isn't that a bit impractical? In terms of borders in the world... which are all like tombstone reminders of wars red in tooth and claw with hundreds of thousands dead... most are illegitimate if you take last 1000 years as the time frame. Or even if you only take the last 150 years... all borders are illegal. What you want to do about it?Heracleum Persicum wrote:Anything less than 5000 yrs ago matters and can be changed (if wrong should be accounted for)
Specially what happened last 1000 yrs .. why ? ? because those event are still UNFOLDING.
Yes, agree must always look forward drawing lesson from the pastParodite wrote:HP, I assume you agree with the mentioned principle: you can watch all day backwards in time to the past...and be happy or very angry with all you see... but you better look especially forward in time.. anticipating the always changing current situation/position.. otherwise Titanic disasters.
Agree Yes/No ?
Parodite wrote:
You made this point:
My question is then: isn't that a bit impractical? In terms of borders in the world... which are all like tombstone reminders of wars red in tooth and claw with hundreds of thousands dead... most are illegitimate if you take last 1000 years as the time frame. Or even if you only take the last 150 years... all borders are illegal. What you want to do about it ?Heracleum Persicum wrote:Anything less than 5000 yrs ago matters and can be changed (if wrong should be accounted for)
Specially what happened last 1000 yrs .. why ? ? because those event are still UNFOLDING.
Very much agree with that. What lessons of past are important lessons to you?Heracleum Persicum wrote:Yes, agree must always look forward drawing lesson from the pastParodite wrote:HP, I assume you agree with the mentioned principle: you can watch all day backwards in time to the past...and be happy or very angry with all you see... but you better look especially forward in time.. anticipating the always changing current situation/position.. otherwise Titanic disasters.
Agree Yes/No ?
Sorry for clipping your entire last part. I'm not sure I agree with you about the new reality with WMD everywhere.. and popular power becoming unstoppable, old friends re-united in new borders. Interesting stuff.. but not what my point and question was all about.Parodite wrote:
You made this point:
My question is then: isn't that a bit impractical? In terms of borders in the world... which are all like tombstone reminders of wars red in tooth and claw with hundreds of thousands dead... most are illegitimate if you take last 1000 years as the time frame. Or even if you only take the last 150 years... all borders are illegal. What you want to do about it ?Heracleum Persicum wrote:Anything less than 5000 yrs ago matters and can be changed (if wrong should be accounted for)
Specially what happened last 1000 yrs .. why ? ? because those event are still UNFOLDING.
A good question, deserves an answer
Thank You Very Much for your post, AzariHeracleum Persicum wrote:Yes, agree must always look forward drawing lesson from the pastParodite wrote:HP, I assume you agree with the mentioned principle: you can watch all day backwards in time to the past...and be happy or very angry with all you see... but you better look especially forward in time.. anticipating the always changing current situation/position.. otherwise Titanic disasters.
Agree Yes/No ?
Agree, YES
Parodite wrote:
You made this point:
My question is then: isn't that a bit impractical? In terms of borders in the world... which are all like tombstone reminders of wars red in tooth and claw with hundreds of thousands dead... most are illegitimate if you take last 1000 years as the time frame. Or even if you only take the last 150 years... all borders are illegal. What you want to do about it ?Heracleum Persicum wrote:Anything less than 5000 yrs ago matters and can be changed (if wrong should be accounted for)
Specially what happened last 1000 yrs .. why ? ? because those event are still UNFOLDING.
A good question, deserves an answer
The most dramatic change of last (say) 100 yrs is how military power became impotent .. nuclear weapon, chemical, biological and other stuff, weapons of MASS destruction now pretty much "mainstream" .. now maybe 50 Nations have access to all the above, in generation or two 100, in five generations probably ALL nations will have access to all those goodies.
Think this way .. in America everybody is armed to prevent big government abusing power (anchors in constitution) .. now, superimpose this to groups having access to WMD to prevent abuse of pig powers.
What will be the result ?
Result will be, Powers (money & economy), big & small, will have no power to force things anymore (with military power)
Meaning no Attila, Chingiz, Hitler, Churchill, Truman, Stalin, Bush and and can WITHSTAND POPULAR POWER
Rumsfeld is "disarmed"
More and more "east Ukrainian" type of things will happen and no one can stop it .. revolt, referendum, declaring independent .. independent of (so called) National borders, but same culture, civilization
Nobody can stop this
That is what I am saying and saying and saying .. GREATER PERSIA
look at the map
All same culture and civilization .. people want to be one again
Will of the people will win
Military power is impotent stopping this as long as people are "literate" knowledgeable and informed
In that sense, borders made by force, bloody killing, British general being drunk drawing on the sand, will evaporate .. Crimea
.
Problem is that Nukes and BioPlague etc are not the same as personal fire arms....The most dramatic change of last (say) 100 yrs is how military power became impotent .. nuclear weapon, chemical, biological and other stuff, weapons of MASS destruction now pretty much "mainstream" .. now maybe 50 Nations have access to all the above, in generation or two 100, in five generations probably ALL nations will have access to all those goodies.
Think this way .. in America everybody is armed to prevent big government abusing power (anchors in constitution) .. now, superimpose this to groups having access to WMD to prevent abuse of pig powers.
Likely Nuclear War(s) or maybe worse...... At least in the Northern Hemisphere....What will be the result ?
I wouldn't be too sure about that.......Result will be, Powers (money & economy), big & small, will have no power to force things anymore (with military power)
Meaning no Attila, Chingiz, Hitler, Churchill, Truman, Stalin, Bush and and can WITHSTAND POPULAR POWER
Probably true......More and more "east Ukrainian" type of things will happen
Not so........and no one can stop it ..
Maybe.....independent of (so called) National borders, but same culture, civilization
Not so.......Nobody can stop this
Lord Have Mercy, Azari.......
All same culture and civilization .. people want to be one again
No guarantee of that....Will of the people will win
Maybe.....Military power is impotent stopping this as long as people are "literate" knowledgeable and informed