Kuro5hin.org: technology and culture, from the trenches
create account | help/FAQ | contact | links | search | IRC | site news
[ Everything | Diaries | Technology | Science | Culture | Politics | Media | News | Internet | Op-Ed | Fiction | Meta | MLP ]
We need your support: buy an ad | premium membership

[P]
Nation of Georgia Sliding Toward Chaos

By kpaul in News
Wed Nov 12, 2003 at 02:48:41 PM EST
Tags: Politics (all tags)
Politics

The Telegraph has reported that the former Soviet republic of Georgia is getting dangerously close to a (second) civil war. President Eduard Shevardnadze (75 years old) has fled Tbilisi, the capital.

Angry protesters have been gathering outside the Parliament building over the last few days. The opposition has accused Shevardnadze of rigging the November 2 elections. There are reports of armed men roaming the streets outside the capital, in conflict with security forces.


Troops loyal to Shevardnadze have been called into the city to restore order and make it safe for the President's return.

From the Telegraph article:

Nino Burjanadze, the parliamentary speaker and an opposition leader, said: "The people standing here in the rain want an elected parliament not an appointed parliament. We want to solve the situation peacefully but we will not take a step back."

There was little sign yesterday that Mr Shevardnadze, 75, the former Soviet foreign minister, was planning to step down. Speaking on national television, he struck a defiant note after returning from a visit to the west of the country to rally support.

"I do not work with threats," he said. "I am, after all, an elderly man and [the opposition] do not need to talk to me in these tones."

Sponsors

Voxel dot net
o Managed Hosting
o VoxCAST Content Delivery
o Raw Infrastructure

Login

Poll
Scariest Conflict?
o East vs. West 3%
o India vs. Pakistan 10%
o Israel vs. Palestinians 5%
o China vs. Taiwan 1%
o US vs. Terror 30%
o Russia vs. Chechnya 1%
o This Georgia thing doesn't sound too good. 0%
o Civil war in Colombia 0%
o Believers vs. non-believers 9%
o God vs. Satan 0%
o Good vs. Evil 3%
o Man vs. Man 11%
o Man vs. Nature 1%
o Man vs. Himself 14%
o other (see below) 3%

Votes: 184
Results | Other Polls

Related Links
o reported
o fled Tbilisi
o accused
o Also by kpaul


Display: Sort:
Nation of Georgia Sliding Toward Chaos | 106 comments (64 topical, 42 editorial, 2 hidden)
Write in vote (2.16 / 6) (#5)
by richarj on Wed Nov 12, 2003 at 12:22:59 AM EST

Pro independence in Indonesia versus those Against it. Note that the violence is happening on several fronts but the biggest at the momemnt seems to be Aceh.

"if you are uncool, don't worry, K5 is still the place for you!" -- rusty
sorry... (none / 1) (#7)
by kpaul on Wed Nov 12, 2003 at 12:26:03 AM EST

i shoulda got that one into the poll. there are so many lately, tho...


2014 Halloween Costumes
[ Parent ]

You forgot about the Congo too [nt] (none / 1) (#51)
by JahToasted on Wed Nov 12, 2003 at 07:49:12 PM EST


______
"I wanna have my kicks before the whole shithouse goes up in flames" -- Jim Morrison
[ Parent ]
also re: Africa... (none / 0) (#73)
by kpaul on Thu Nov 13, 2003 at 08:55:34 PM EST

Zimbabwe, Nigeria, South Africa, Somalia ...


2014 Halloween Costumes
[ Parent ]

There always are [nt] (none / 0) (#60)
by nebbish on Thu Nov 13, 2003 at 08:01:03 AM EST


---------
Kicking someone in the head is like punching them in the foot - Bruce Lee
[ Parent ]

more sources... (3.00 / 11) (#14)
by kpaul on Wed Nov 12, 2003 at 01:33:00 AM EST

Washington Times: Turmoil gripping Tblisi

WaPo: Pressure Mounts on Georgian Leader

Financial Times: Funding for oil pipeline project approved

Voice of America: Georgian Officials Warn Protesters of Strong Action

AP via Moscow Times: EBRD to Fund U.S.-Backed Caspian Oil Pipeline Project

Gateway to Russia: Troops step up checks in tense ex-Soviet Georgia (this site had a banner ad on the left for a Su-30 military jet?)

Interfax, Azerbaijan: EBRD Board approves BTC pipeline financing


2014 Halloween Costumes

Related bloggage (1.85 / 7) (#17)
by Lode Runner on Wed Nov 12, 2003 at 01:58:49 AM EST

Cinderella Bloggerfeller

Living With Caucasians

Scariest Conflict (write-in) (1.09 / 11) (#27)
by Akshay on Wed Nov 12, 2003 at 05:15:43 AM EST

Red Hat versus Linux community.

God damn it, get back in line (1.07 / 13) (#33)
by My Other Account Is A Hulver on Wed Nov 12, 2003 at 07:02:55 AM EST

We've got to stabalize Iran, Syria and North Korea first.  We'll get to you when we're good and ready.

I believe drduck is a genuine account, and I don't delete him because I'm a hypocrite. - rusty
Scariest Confilict (1.38 / 18) (#36)
by duffbeer703 on Wed Nov 12, 2003 at 08:36:27 AM EST

Muslims vs. World

Kuro5hin vs. trolls? (none / 2) (#66)
by Merc on Thu Nov 13, 2003 at 12:02:05 PM EST



[ Parent ]
Nah (none / 0) (#84)
by TheModerate on Sat Nov 15, 2003 at 01:34:22 PM EST

There's no conflict. Its like Yin and Yang.

"What a man has in himself is, then, the chief element in his happiness." -- Schopenhauer
[ Parent ]

The scariest conflict (1.80 / 5) (#44)
by CaptainSuperBoy on Wed Nov 12, 2003 at 12:28:35 PM EST

I'd say that India and Pakistan are the scariest conflict right now. While the war on terror is no picnic, I think we can at least trust the US not to launch a nuclear strike on a rogue nation, even North Korea. The same thing can't be said for India and Pakistan.

--
jimmysquid.com - I take pictures.
India vs. Pakistan: (none / 2) (#54)
by Attackist on Thu Nov 13, 2003 at 02:29:36 AM EST

Child's play compared to the nearly 50 years of cold war between the US and the USSR. Just thought I'd mention that.

"See, I will let you have cow's dung instead of human dung, on which you may prepare your bread." -- God Almighty

(/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\)
[ Parent ]

Except for the distance (2.75 / 4) (#65)
by Merc on Thu Nov 13, 2003 at 12:00:36 PM EST

If an ICBM were launched from Russia towards the US, there's a good chance it would take at least 10 minutes to get there. That gave them time to evaluate the situation. That's a good thing, because on a number of occasions, it took at least 5 minutes to determine a threat wasn't real.

On the other hand, India and Pakistan are next-door neighbors. They have a fraction of the time to determine if an attack is real or not. That's what makes it scarier.



[ Parent ]
I don't think we've ever... (none / 0) (#78)
by FieryTaco on Thu Nov 13, 2003 at 09:43:49 PM EST

I do not believe that anyone has ever built a missile that can be launched from Russia and get to the US in 10 minutes. Unless you're talking about lobbing a missile from Kavacha and hitting Nome. Then, sure 10 minutes.

[ Parent ]
Worst case scenario (none / 0) (#58)
by Lord of Caustic Soda on Thu Nov 13, 2003 at 07:29:56 AM EST

Probably Pakistan managing to send a nuke to Delhi before it gets erased from the world map.

[ Parent ]
Funny choice of words (none / 0) (#62)
by CaptainSuperBoy on Thu Nov 13, 2003 at 08:44:02 AM EST

I wouldn't call the deaths of millions of Pakistanis a "worst case scenario," I'd call it an unbelievable tragedy.

--
jimmysquid.com - I take pictures.
[ Parent ]
I know it's all cold and unfeeling to say this (none / 2) (#63)
by Lord of Caustic Soda on Thu Nov 13, 2003 at 08:59:24 AM EST

but when shit happens, shit happens - when some moustached dictator said "Hey guys, let's gas some Jews" and a good number of people, probably after an Oktoberfest party gone horribly, horribly wrong, responded "Yeah, why not gas some Jews", and the rest of the country went "Oh well, better the Jews than me", what can you do?

Sure there's the fight the good fight and vive la resistance and all that, but the regular Joe has his limits.

[ Parent ]

can you trust us? (none / 0) (#72)
by kpaul on Thu Nov 13, 2003 at 08:41:15 PM EST

the US was the first and only country to launch a nuke...

with their underground bunkers and cities, i can see certain people (any of us) using them again, thinking at least they would be safe in their fortified caves...

Israel might also pre-emptively launch a nuke, I think. As well as Russia. And China. The power structure of the planet is changing. The World Wars of last century caused massive havoc and changed the power structures around the planet.

in any case, if it's meant to happen it happens. i just try to maintain my faith that choosing Jesus is the right path. and help people along the way... ;)


2014 Halloween Costumes
[ Parent ]

One of the reasons this is important (2.57 / 7) (#48)
by aphrael on Wed Nov 12, 2003 at 01:37:25 PM EST

Various entities are in the process of building an oil pipeline from the Azeri port of Baku (on the Caspian Sea) through Azerbaijan, Georgia, and Turkey, to a port on the Mediterranean. This is considered to be of prime importance for exporting Caspian and Kazakh oil, most of which would be consumed by Europe. The pipeline builders chose this route over Iran due to US objections to a pipeline through Iran, and decided to go through Georgia instead of Armenia because of continuing difficulties between the Azeris and the Armenians.

Scariest conf;ict? K5 v hUsI ?? [n/t] (1.00 / 8) (#49)
by Pop Top on Wed Nov 12, 2003 at 01:47:17 PM EST



Shevardnadze forced to seek support from Russia (none / 2) (#52)
by BlowCat on Wed Nov 12, 2003 at 08:32:51 PM EST

Actually, even if the official results are to be trusted, the two opposition parties together got about 25% - more than the parties led by Shedardnadze and Abashidze (leader of mostly islamic Adjaria), which received around 20% each. The opposition could actually form the goverment if they were smart not to force their opponents to consolidate. Now Shevardnadze is going to form alliance with Abashidze, who is supported from Moscow. They will return to Tbilisi and reassert power. I just hope that don't go too far and don't start the civil war themselves.

Support as in Russian Peacekeeping Troops? (none / 0) (#57)
by Lord of Caustic Soda on Thu Nov 13, 2003 at 07:28:07 AM EST

Ah, just like the good ol' days.

[ Parent ]
Scariest conflict (1.33 / 6) (#53)
by mmsmatt on Wed Nov 12, 2003 at 09:22:37 PM EST

New EU Beauracracy v. Soverign Nations

There is no conflict. (none / 1) (#56)
by Lord of Caustic Soda on Thu Nov 13, 2003 at 07:26:38 AM EST

Only the inevitable Deutscheland Uber Alles that got delayed twice last century.

[ Parent ]
This scares you more than war? [nt] (none / 1) (#59)
by nebbish on Thu Nov 13, 2003 at 07:59:06 AM EST


---------
Kicking someone in the head is like punching them in the foot - Bruce Lee
[ Parent ]

Good and friggin' Evil ?? (2.40 / 5) (#61)
by OzJuggler on Thu Nov 13, 2003 at 08:05:40 AM EST

Love the poll results right now...
From over 120 votes counted there is:
God vs Satan - 0 votes
Good vs Evil - 5 votes

You could interpret this in all sorts of ways. The way I see it is that there are some mental retards here who would not vote for God vs Satan because that pair are just Christian fictional characters, but of course they WILL vote for Good vs Evil because both of those are REAL...
(...except they aren't real.)

People who cling to the childish concepts of good and evil well into their alleged "adulthood" are a danger to us all. At least if you prefer God vs Satan your beliefs can be constrained by Judaeo-Christian dogma and moderated by clergy. But one whiff of this Good and Evil bullshit and there's no telling what horrors you can justify.

The sooner everyone gets it into their thick heads that absolutist moral frameworks should have been discarded back in the 18th century then the sooner people will realise that humanist relativism is the only moral framework that can explain the realities of this crazy mixed up world.

Good and Evil, indeed! If I polled k5 on who can see in colour and who can only see in black and white, I wonder if there'd be 5 votes for option B?
"And I will not rest until every year families gather to spend December 25th together
at Osama's homo abortion pot and commie jizzporium." - Jon Stewart's gift to Bill O'Reilly, 7 Dec 2005.

Some people are Manichaeans. (none / 0) (#64)
by gzt on Thu Nov 13, 2003 at 10:03:37 AM EST

Or other forms of dualists. But, if they aren't, they may see the mythical Manichaean conflict between Good and Evil as more frightening than the mythical Christian battle between God and Satan. While I do agree that Manichaeans are misguided and hold a philosophically precarious position, I think you're wholly unjustified in everything else you have and ever will say about anything in any matter.

[ Parent ]
Err? (none / 0) (#77)
by FieryTaco on Thu Nov 13, 2003 at 09:33:36 PM EST

Did you just say "You're wrong. You'll always be wrong. About everything?" (I think you're wholly unjustified in everything else you have and ever will say about anything in any matter.)

[ Parent ]
No. (none / 1) (#80)
by gzt on Thu Nov 13, 2003 at 10:33:03 PM EST

Read carefully. He may be right at times, but not justified. Will you be earning this label, too?

[ Parent ]
I have the right answer for the wrong reasons? (none / 0) (#97)
by OzJuggler on Mon Nov 17, 2003 at 12:20:50 AM EST

If that is so then I must apologise for my moral theoretic ineptitude because I do not think the ends ever justify the means.

If you care to, please equip me with the right justifications for my solution - whatever you may think my solution was.

I only ask because your initial explanation left me confused about why I may have been wrong with my priorities. You have introduced me to the term "Manichaean", which I assume is characterised by a belief in a battle between Good and Evil. Based on this alone, I would see Christianity as a subtype of Manichaeanism (if there is such a word) in which God is personification of Good and Satan is the personification of Evil.
Your argument says:

  1. Some people are Manichaeans and some people are not.
  2. People who are NOT Manichaeans see Good vs Evil as more frightening than God vs Satan.
  3. Manichaeanism is philosophically precarious.
My presumption that God-vs-Satan is simply a subtype of Good-vs-Evil cannot be correct since it would lead me to the conclusion that people who are not Manichaeans see Good-vs-Evil as more frightening than Good-vs-Evil.

I have already identified that God-vs-Satan must be taken as only a part of the whole Christian package. What is special about God-vs-Satan then is that its activity is moderated by clergy and is confined by an unchanging (but ambiguous) religious text such as The Bible, whereas Good-vs-Evil does not have nearly as many dependencies and constraints. This would allow Good-vs-Evil to change and proceed more vigorously, and therefore makes it more frightening than God-vs-Satan.

So in summary I have no idea what either of us was talking about.
"And I will not rest until every year families gather to spend December 25th together
at Osama's homo abortion pot and commie jizzporium." - Jon Stewart's gift to Bill O'Reilly, 7 Dec 2005.
[ Parent ]

Okay, cool. (none / 1) (#102)
by gzt on Tue Nov 18, 2003 at 11:07:54 PM EST

The Christian system is monistic, Manichaeanism is dualistic. Christianity stands in contrast to Manichaean thought, it is not a subset of it. Anyways, I will explain that and my argument.
  1. Some people are Manichaeans, and therefore may legitimately view Good vs. Evil as more scary than God vs. Satan.
  2. Some people who are not Manichaeans can see Good vs. Evil [either the Manichaean myth or some sort of idealistic battle or whatever else it is] as more frightening than God vs. Satan [the Christian myth].
  3. Manichaeanism is philosophically precarious.
Manichaeanism specifically refers to a conflict between an evil material god and a good spiritual god, but is often used to refer to a dualistic system where both Good and Evil are uncreated and equal. Christianity is not dualistic, only God is eternal and He is the creator of all things. In fact, Satan himself is not evil in essence, he only does evil things.

The only thing you got right in the original post was #3, and you only got that tangentially. In case you're wondering, the proper refutation to Manichaeanism is to note that there is no basis to say one god is good and the other is evil. Both good and evil are coeternal and equally powerful, what priviledges one over the other?

And you do have a point about those who believe in Good vs. Evil as opposed to those who believe in God vs. Satan - Christians are constrained by the Tradition of the Church [at least, they should be, except for those silly schismatic groups], while those believing in Good vs. Evil can go wherever their gnostic fantasy leads to - even choosing Evil over Good. I was far too mean in my original post, just be careful when interpreting data and promoting humanistic relativism. As an absolutist, I won't stand for it.

[ Parent ]

You fool (none / 1) (#67)
by Josh A on Thu Nov 13, 2003 at 12:30:38 PM EST

I voted for Good vs Evil precisely because they aren't, as you put it, "real". You don't find it frightening to think that people are actually fighting such a fight?

Many other conflicts, including some of the poll options, are just specific cases of this general problem.

---
Thank God for Canada, if only because they annoy the Republicans so much. – Blarney


[ Parent ]
A misunderstanding. (none / 0) (#98)
by OzJuggler on Mon Nov 17, 2003 at 12:23:29 AM EST

I will confess that in my earlier post I failed to discriminate between the belief that "Good vs Evil is the most frightening threat" and the belief that "Believing in Good vs Evil is the most frightening threat".
I had presumed that anyone ticking that box believed in Good and Evil, and I did so on the basis that the question was asking about real threats and required a concrete answer.
"And I will not rest until every year families gather to spend December 25th together
at Osama's homo abortion pot and commie jizzporium." - Jon Stewart's gift to Bill O'Reilly, 7 Dec 2005.
[ Parent ]
Next time :) [n/t] (none / 0) (#106)
by Josh A on Tue Nov 25, 2003 at 06:13:32 AM EST


---
Thank God for Canada, if only because they annoy the Republicans so much. – Blarney


[ Parent ]
I find your ideas intriguing (2.50 / 4) (#68)
by Battle Troll on Thu Nov 13, 2003 at 02:07:41 PM EST

humanist relativism is the only moral framework that can explain the realities of this crazy mixed up world

And wish to subscribe to your newsletter.
--
Skarphedinn was carrying the axe with which he had killed Thrainn Sigfusson and which he called 'Battle Troll.'
Njal's Saga, ca 1280 AD
[ Parent ]

Crazy mixed up world? (none / 0) (#69)
by Gothmolly on Thu Nov 13, 2003 at 02:48:14 PM EST

Perhaps it is your belief that nothing is objective which causes you to call the world "crazy" and "mixed up"? Interestingly, you mention "this" world. And you invoke 18th century philosophers, when really you mean 19th century, Kant and Hume. Well, there ARE those who "set aside reason to make room for faith". They live in mud huts and shake their fists at the sky which does not provide them the same lifestyle that a philosophy of reason, and productive work provide.

[ Parent ]
hmm (none / 0) (#74)
by Battle Troll on Thu Nov 13, 2003 at 09:05:14 PM EST

a philosophy of reason, and productive work

Smells like Ayn Rand to me.
--
Skarphedinn was carrying the axe with which he had killed Thrainn Sigfusson and which he called 'Battle Troll.'
Njal's Saga, ca 1280 AD
[ Parent ]

Well (none / 1) (#85)
by TheModerate on Sat Nov 15, 2003 at 01:35:04 PM EST

Productive work doesn't necessarily provide us with anything. Production can mean anything from standing behind an assembly line putting widgits together (which is essentially anti-life) to working creatively to assert your will on the world (which must be pro-life for most people). So being productive, itself, can't be said to be a virtue. It is what you produce and how you produce it that matters. Not only that, but being a 8 hrs/day, 5 days/week worker uses up the nervous energies that are required for the creative will and the intellect. That is our danger.

Now, the "philosophy of reason" would have told you this—but we all make mistakes. We are endowed with an inherent irrationality, and yes, even irrationality can be pro-life.

"What a man has in himself is, then, the chief element in his happiness." -- Schopenhauer
[ Parent ]

dear sir: you are completely wrong. (none / 0) (#88)
by gzt on Sat Nov 15, 2003 at 04:39:52 PM EST

The fundamental mistake: defining worthwhile life as exercise of the will towards creation.

standing behind an assembly line putting widgits together (which is essentially anti-life)

While I do agree that you would wither and die in a factory, and that I myself do not "dig" the 40-hour work week and manual labor, I do not agree that work on a production line is anti-life. Those I know who worked as such did not seem any more or less endowed with life [or however your silly philosophy would describe it] than those engaged in so-called[1] "creative" work. I would say it is anti-life only insofar as anybody would rather do what they want than what the job requires for 8 hours of their day. If that is what you mean by "creatively asserting one's will on the world", then your only sin is not saying anything interesting.

A counterpoint to your "sapping creative energies" argument: Faulkner.

Actually looking at the world instead of trying to be an intellectual would have told you this.

[ Parent ]

I forgot my footnote (none / 0) (#89)
by gzt on Sat Nov 15, 2003 at 04:42:12 PM EST

[1]I can't resist saying it, though "so-called" adds no content. What isn't so-called?

[ Parent ]
Thanks, I think (none / 0) (#90)
by TheModerate on Sat Nov 15, 2003 at 06:26:45 PM EST

The fundamental mistake: defining worthwhile life as exercise of the will towards creation.

This isn't my claim.

"While I do agree that you would wither and die in a factory, and that I myself do not 'dig' the 40-hour work week and manual labor, I do not agree that work on a production line is anti-life. Those I know who worked as such did not seem any more or less endowed with life [or however your silly philosophy would describe it] than those engaged in so-called[1] "creative" work."

Our experiences differ.

"Actually looking at the world instead of trying to be an intellectual would have told you this."

If you will permit me to try to be an intellectual a little longer, I'll try to elaborate. I was trying to show that production isn't a virtue, and I showed this by deconstructing it into at least two parts—no doubt there are others. One part, I granted was virtuous (not for everyone, though), the other part I described as vicious. But here we miscommunicated—you didn't like my style.

Is working at an assembly line anti-life? Don't like the word? Okay, then how about causes suffering? Doing the same thing over and over again, day-in and day-out sucks. And people try to value themselves, and they try to value themselves for what they do. Like me, as I try to be an intellectual, I post to crap internet forums like this one, trying to give my pathetic existance meaning. The same goes for the assembly worker—he tries to value that which, at the same time, causes him the most harm. Does he give up? I say he gives up. He works for the money, only, with no time to spend it. When he gets home, which is what he lives for, he doesn't really want to go anywhere or do anything. He's worn down. He would give up but doesn't have the energy. Do you see what I mean by anti-life now?

"What a man has in himself is, then, the chief element in his happiness." -- Schopenhauer
[ Parent ]

huh? (none / 2) (#91)
by Battle Troll on Sat Nov 15, 2003 at 08:20:49 PM EST

In the XIXth century, factory work was often horribly unpleasant. Today, while it may not be as fun as a day at Disney World, in the first world people are generally quite happy to get work in mills and factories. Even gutting chickens at 7 bucks an hour (which gives you carpal tunnel) is superior enough to the alternatives elsewhere that the industrialized nations are struggling to absorb massive amounts of immigration from all the other countries.

I mean, you have to consider peoples' alternatives here. Is it more fun to run a 1/5-acre wet-rice farm in Cambodia than it is to gut chickens in an American factory? Don't forget, the chicken-gutter only works about 75 hours a week - farmers generally work a lot more than that. Chicken-gutters don't have to have weapons in case the local bandits decide to steal their harvest. Chicken-gutters have access to mass-produced goods and services that are spectacularly cheaper than handicrafts.

Lots of people in the first world were not brought up to manual labour; quite naturally, they hate it. My experience is a little different. I'm working on my third graduate degree, for reference; but I was brought up on a very old-fashioned farm, and have dug wells and dugouts, hoed endless potato ridges, planted corn with a 30's-vintage manual planter, and so forth. I live in a large apartment building downtown and I'm pining for labour - I want to dig things, plant a garden, build things out of wood, and so forth. While working in a factory might seem to you to be much more unpleasant than sitting around reading, I know a lot of working folks who would hate a job that never had them moving things, lifting things, building things, and fixing things.

how about causes suffering? Doing the same thing over and over again, day-in and day-out sucks

Again, you've just desribed the situation of more than 99% of all the human beings who have ever lived. I'm sure it must have occured to you that the existence of a comparatively large (historically speaking) leisure class today is entirely dependent upon industrial production of food and goods. You wouldn't be free to think all day were it not for the hundreds of hands that built your home, produced your food from the bare dirt itself, assembled your computer, sewed your clothing, manufactured your car/bicycle (and refined its gasoline, attached its upholstery, manufactured the rubber for its tires, finished the rubber into tires,) etc. etc. ad nauseam.

Again: if you post to this forum, you are more than likely a member of the leisure class. But not everyone can be.
--
Skarphedinn was carrying the axe with which he had killed Thrainn Sigfusson and which he called 'Battle Troll.'
Njal's Saga, ca 1280 AD
[ Parent ]

I'm glad you aren't contending that. (none / 0) (#95)
by gzt on Sun Nov 16, 2003 at 04:01:21 PM EST

And as for our experiences differing, perhaps one day you will see the world.

I realize you were arguing that mere production isn't a virtue: I agree. I disagree with your examples supporting your contention. My gripe isn't stylistic, it cuts to the core of your example. First, suffering is inevitable in life, and while exploitive labor can be considered as a "cause" of suffering, you must make more of an argument to prove that such is true in a typical Western-style factory with a 40 hr work week. Your little anecdote, while heartrending, isn't supported by the facts. It may often be true, but is factory labor the cause? Such exhaustion is seen in all occupations, many workers don't experience these symptoms, and if they do, they don't always reckon it as suffering. Sure, they don't like their job, but it's a job. It's no more life-denying than what you do, perhaps even less so, since you're a would-be intellectual. Ooh, another counterpoint: Eric Hoffer.

The short of it: you have a few counterexamples to explain and a lot of empirical data to explain before your philosophy is anything but wank and hatred for blue-collar work.

See Mr. Troll's response for other criticisms.

[ Parent ]

Sure (none / 0) (#100)
by TheModerate on Tue Nov 18, 2003 at 11:50:48 AM EST

"First, suffering is inevitable in life, and while exploitive labor can be considered as a "cause" of suffering, you must make more of an argument to prove that such is true in a typical Western-style factory with a 40 hr work week."

I already told you—monotony, inside, with long hours. Maybe you're right, not sure.

"hatred for blue-collar work."

What?

And I didn't respond to MrTroll because I thought he was trolling me. He somehow thought I had something against manual labor—I don't know where he came up with that, and now you seem to be doing something similar. I don't get it.

"What a man has in himself is, then, the chief element in his happiness." -- Schopenhauer
[ Parent ]

the point: (none / 1) (#101)
by gzt on Tue Nov 18, 2003 at 10:28:29 PM EST

In the future, I suggest you pay attention to arguments rather than usernames, as Mr. Troll is anything but a troll. Even if he were trolling, I'd still suggest you listen: I've learned far more from the trolls than the philosophes on this site.

The point: while factory work may not be desirable, it is often superior to the alternatives and is hardly so bad as you think, especially as reported by those doing the labor. So while you may reckon "monotony, inside, with long hours" as a sufficient case for "causes suffering", I've been there and got the t-shirt: it isn't that bad. Part of Mr. Troll's point is that work in American factories is seen to be far better than various other sorts of manual labor in other parts of the world, especially subsistence farming in the third world. Therefore, one must consider the alternatives available to the laborer [and their preferences] in order to determine whether or not an arrangement causes suffering.

Re: the hatred. I don't see how you can read Mr. Troll as saying it, and I was being slightly trollish in saying that, but my point is this: you seem all too willing to describe manual labor as suffering.

cheers,
gzt

[ Parent ]

19th century, Kant and Hume. (none / 1) (#94)
by jonathan_ingram on Sun Nov 16, 2003 at 08:52:17 AM EST

Hume: 1711-1776
Kant: 1724-1804
-- Jon
[ Parent ]
3, insightful and different! (none / 0) (#71)
by Fen on Thu Nov 13, 2003 at 06:23:43 PM EST

Although what's up with the 18th century. They should have been given up long ago, when animals first started believing such nonsense.
--Self.
[ Parent ]
then that would be... (none / 0) (#75)
by kpaul on Thu Nov 13, 2003 at 09:14:36 PM EST

man vs. man or man vs. himself for you, no?


2014 Halloween Costumes
[ Parent ]

I have no idea what you're saying. (none / 1) (#76)
by FieryTaco on Thu Nov 13, 2003 at 09:32:07 PM EST

But this:
...the sooner people will realise that humanist relativism is the only moral framework that can explain the realities of this crazy mixed up world.
makes absolutely no sense. Moral frameworks do not explain realities. Moral framworks are how you make decisions about how you want to live your life. You can try and guess what moral framework other people are living under, but the vast majority certainly aren't using "humanist relativism."

[ Parent ]
Absolutist is fine with me (none / 0) (#105)
by error 404 on Mon Nov 24, 2003 at 11:39:56 AM EST

But I agree that the scariest conflict is that in which both of the the protagonists see it as Good vs. Evil.

Not because absolute moral codes are obsolete (in these days of artificial insemination and more than adequate population, sex could be considered obsolete) or even wrong (is there any doubt in your mind that killing people in order to prop up unjustified beleifs is bad, no ifs ands or buts? That's an absolute moral code.) but because when someone sees themselves and their cause as Good and there opposition as Evil, they are no longer bound by any moral code except the imperative of victory.

There are any number of conflicts where an outside observer can see it as good vs. evil, and those are fine. The problem is when the protagonists see it that way - precisely because that perception trumps absolute moral codes.


..................................
Electrical banana is bound to be the very next phase
- Donovan

[ Parent ]

Why This Makes It Difficult for Me To sleep nights (none / 1) (#70)
by artsygeek on Thu Nov 13, 2003 at 05:37:34 PM EST

Georgia's proximity to the Caspian Sea (and the Middle East) makes it a much better breeding ground for terror with such instability.  Worst of all, it has been deemed by several organizations to be a possible location for the proliferation of Nuclear, Chemical, and Biological weapons to terrorists due to a lack of security.

In other news... (none / 1) (#79)
by runderwo on Thu Nov 13, 2003 at 10:24:29 PM EST

The Republic of Texas today announced plans to once again assert independence from the federal government. More news as it comes in.

More Power to Them! (none / 0) (#87)
by Lai Lai Boy on Sat Nov 15, 2003 at 02:24:50 PM EST

I wish it would, then George Bush wouldn't be President.

[Posted from Mozilla Firebird]
[ Parent ]

Scariest conflict (2.00 / 4) (#81)
by Kasreyn on Fri Nov 14, 2003 at 01:45:46 AM EST

RMS vs anyone who doesn't prefix "GNU/" to "Linux".


-Kasreyn


"Extenuating circumstance to be mentioned on Judgement Day:
We never asked to be born in the first place."

R.I.P. Kurt. You will be missed.
Georgia on my mind (none / 0) (#82)
by Quietti on Fri Nov 14, 2003 at 07:14:04 AM EST

The question is, did he mean Atlanta or Tsibli?

In any case, I wish good luck to former Soviet republics of the Muslim world. They will need it... :(

--
The whole point of civilization is to reduce how much the average person has to think. - Stef Murky

Georgia is Christian. (none / 0) (#83)
by tkatchev on Fri Nov 14, 2003 at 12:13:24 PM EST

Always has been, since antiquity.

   -- Signed, Lev Andropoff, cosmonaut.
[ Parent ]

Armenia too IIRC (n/t) (none / 0) (#93)
by Quietti on Sun Nov 16, 2003 at 07:19:06 AM EST



--
The whole point of civilization is to reduce how much the average person has to think. - Stef Murky
[ Parent ]
Hmm (none / 2) (#86)
by TheModerate on Sat Nov 15, 2003 at 01:39:46 PM EST

The two highest conflicts in the poll are the US vs Terror, and Man vs Himself. This doesn't surprise me, they are the same conflict.

"What a man has in himself is, then, the chief element in his happiness." -- Schopenhauer

Scariest Conflict? (none / 0) (#96)
by mayo on Sun Nov 16, 2003 at 07:49:38 PM EST

The battle of the sexes. It's pure carnage, attrocities are committed daily and there is no end in sight any time soon...

No problem (none / 1) (#99)
by RainyRat on Tue Nov 18, 2003 at 07:37:39 AM EST

Just get Sam Fisher on the case.




Eagles may soar, but rats seldom get sucked into jet engines.
pictures of parliament being stormed 11/22/03 (none / 0) (#103)
by kpaul on Sat Nov 22, 2003 at 06:54:52 PM EST

BBC ...


2014 Halloween Costumes

but.... (none / 0) (#104)
by /dev/trash on Sun Nov 23, 2003 at 06:01:03 PM EST

Shevardnadze has apparently signed his resignation papers...

---
Updated NEW 10/15/2003!!
New Site, More Parks
Nation of Georgia Sliding Toward Chaos | 106 comments (64 topical, 42 editorial, 2 hidden)
Display: Sort:

kuro5hin.org

[XML]
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective companies. The Rest 2000 - Present Kuro5hin.org Inc.
See our legalese page for copyright policies. Please also read our Privacy Policy.
Kuro5hin.org is powered by Free Software, including Apache, Perl, and Linux, The Scoop Engine that runs this site is freely available, under the terms of the GPL.
Need some help? Email help@kuro5hin.org.
My heart's the long stairs.

Powered by Scoop create account | help/FAQ | mission | links | search | IRC | YOU choose the stories!