14-Oct-10 News -- Millions of strikers shut down France

[John]

14-Oct-10 News -- Millions of strikers shut down France

** 14-Oct-10 News -- Millions of strikers shut down France
** http://www.generationaldynamics.com/cgi-bin/D.PL?xct=gd.e101014#e101014

Contents:
"Up to 3.5 million strikers shut down France and threaten radicalization"
"Some observations on the growth of xenophobia"

[OLD1953]

I'm saddened, but not shocked, at the rise of xenophobia across the world. When things get tough, it's just very easy to blame the "other" for all your troubles. And that's just what's going on, and nobody in government is willing to stand up and fight it - at least not in Europe. Bush made extreme moves to prevent reaction against Muslims after 9-11, but Obama hasn't been able to do as much, largely because 1/3 of the US is convinced he's a secret Muslim. Even so, we aren't nearly in the state Europe has created. Of course, Europe is under a good deal more pressure from the Muslim countries, and they are reacting harder. 9-11 was a world changing event for Europe more than for the US, because the US no longer pressed Europe to accomodate their Muslim population, and when the lid was pulled off that pressure cooker, it pretty much put a hole in the ceiling.

And of course the "other side" becomes paranoid and talks of "winning" a culture war. Nobody in history has ever "won" such a thing, sans extermination of one side by the other, and that is actually very rare. Most of the "examples" of such people give simply vanish on an actual close inspection, assimilation and blending took place, because that's just how it works, total extermination is a rarity in history.

I've known a fair number of Iranians and others from the MidEast, they are different, certainly, but I'd not call them evil by any stretch. They do believe they are better than we are, we believe the same thing, it's a mirror symmetry and present just about everywhere.

And, to be upfront here, I do believe immigration got out of hand over the last 30 years, but not for the reasons most people have. The two major reasons I think it should have been controlled to be lower is because open border immigration AMPLIFIES xenophobia, and the other reason is that we've pulled so many people out of Mexico that Mexico is badly damaged - something the Mexican government is just now figuring out. And that's not going to help either.

[boqueronman]

Oooh, where to start. Let me suggest that 1,300 years of mutual Christian-Muslim suspicion, distrust and hatred might play some teeny tiny part in the so-called "xenophobia" exhibited in much of the world today. Every century since the formation of the Muslim religion (let's not use the term militant Islam which is straight from the Dept of Redundancy Dept) has seen acts of unspeakable barbarity - torture, kidnapping, slavery and mass murder. For an introduction to historical reality I suggest Roger Crowley's "Empires of the Sea" for a graphic description of how this conflict played out in the Mediterranean during the 16th century. In sum, the default position for relations between the West and Islam has been, and may well return to, generalized violent conflict. The past century of relative peace has masked the savagery only shallowly interred during the cultural and technological dominance of the West, which is visibly eroding as we speak. Describing the rocks sliding down the hill as the landslide begins as "xenophobia" is laughably inadequate. I'm surprised that generational dynamics theory cannot account in the present for what these 1,300 years of history should have prepared us. Can this "mean reversion" be sidetrack, or tamed? The odds for that don't seem to be very high.

[John]

> Oooh, where to start. Let me suggest that 1,300 years of mutual
> Christian-Muslim suspicion, distrust and hatred might play some
> teeny tiny part in the so-called "xenophobia" exhibited in much of
> the world today. Every century since the formation of the Muslim
> religion (let's not use the term militant Islam which is straight
> from the Dept of Redundancy Dept) has seen acts of unspeakable
> barbarity - torture, kidnapping, slavery and mass murder. For an
> introduction to historical reality I suggest Roger Crowley's
> "Empires of the Sea" for a graphic description of how this
> conflict played out in the Mediterranean during the 16th
> century. In sum, the default position for relations between the
> West and Islam has been, and may well return to, generalized
> violent conflict. The past century of relative peace has masked
> the savagery only shallowly interred during the cultural and
> technological dominance of the West, which is visibly eroding as
> we speak. Describing the rocks sliding down the hill as the
> landslide begins as "xenophobia" is laughably inadequate. I'm
> surprised that generational dynamics theory cannot account in the
> present for what these 1,300 years of history should have prepared
> us. Can this "mean reversion" be sidetrack, or tamed? The odds for
> that don't seem to be very high."

This description contains some errors and misdirections. You seem to
have very little knowledge of history to justify the tone you're
taking.

To say that the West and Islam have been in conflict for centuries is
true in a sense, but it doesn't capture the essence of what's been
going on. A much more accurate statement is to say that the Muslim
civilization, especially the Sunni Muslims, have been at war mainly
with the Eastern Christian civilization, with most of the crisis wars
focused on the Caucasus, the Crimea, and the Balkans.

And yes there were wars between Muslims and the West in the 16th
century, as there were in every century, but the most significant
ones occurred in the 15th century (the fall of Constantinople
and the Reconquest of Spain), and in the 17th century (the War
with the Holy League).

You refer to "the past century of relative peace," which is absurd.
The last century saw the collapse of the Ottoman Empire, and the
Balkan wars in the 1990s. These generational crisis wars were
extremely bloody and violent.

See the following book chapter:

** Chapter 9 -- Islam versus Orthodox Christianity
** http://www.generationaldynamics.com/cgi-bin/D.PL?d=ww2010.book.easteurope

I think I'll stop here. The rest of your posting is silly nonsense.

John

[OLD1953]

Oooh, where to start. Let me suggest that 1,300 years of mutual Christian-Muslim suspicion, distrust and hatred might play some teeny tiny part in the so-called "xenophobia" exhibited in much of the world today. Every century since the formation of the Muslim religion (let's not use the term militant Islam which is straight from the Dept of Redundancy Dept) has seen acts of unspeakable barbarity - torture, kidnapping, slavery and mass murder. For an introduction to historical reality I suggest Roger Crowley's "Empires of the Sea" for a graphic description of how this conflict played out in the Mediterranean during the 16th century. In sum, the default position for relations between the West and Islam has been, and may well return to, generalized violent conflict. The past century of relative peace has masked the savagery only shallowly interred during the cultural and technological dominance of the West, which is visibly eroding as we speak. Describing the rocks sliding down the hill as the landslide begins as "xenophobia" is laughably inadequate. I'm surprised that generational dynamics theory cannot account in the present for what these 1,300 years of history should have prepared us. Can this "mean reversion" be sidetrack, or tamed? The odds for that don't seem to be very high.

And the difference between these wars and the wars between Christian nations over that period is?

[shoshin]

geez, John, I know you're busy, but I need you to be more punctual with these news updates! I'm lying in bed at 5:45AM, waiting to get up, and playing with my iPhone, and I usually have fun reading your news update. But lately, you have been tardy, so I am forced to go to Google News, or someplace else, without having the benefit of your insights! C'mon, John, your public needs you!

[John]

> geez, John, I know you're busy, but I need you to be more punctual
> with these news updates! I'm lying in bed at 5:45AM, waiting to
> get up, and playing with my iPhone, and I usually have fun reading
> your news update. But lately, you have been tardy, so I am forced
> to go to Google News, or someplace else, without having the
> benefit of your insights! C'mon, John, your public needs you!

I know, I know, Dave, it's terrible! I just got today's article
posted, and it's almost 11 am.

I just can't myself psyched up to write about anything that's
going on now.

But you know, it's almost like there's nothing going on in the world.
The news channels talk about nothing but the election, the financial
channels talk about financial minutiae, and the BBC has been running
hours of uninterrupted coverage of the miners.

It's almost like the world is slowing down.

It shouldn't be too long before the fireworks start again somewhere,
and then I should be a more reliable blogger again.

John

[shoshin]

thanks, John, I was only kidding, of course....I definitely appreciate the work you do, it helps me understand the events in world just a little better.