Modern slavery question

[PurpleTree]

16 minutes ago, Emerald said:

..

So how are these countries some of the most barbarous?

Also what do you mean by barbarous? Edit ok i read your explanation/idea.

But i don’t agree with your view at all.

For example Russia. Very “barbarous” in foreign policy yet the populace doesn’t have  that much freedom for self development or how ever you put it.

 

Or would you say Canada is still very “barbarous” in its foreign policy compared to lets say Iran, North Korea, Somalia?

Edited 7 hours ago by PurpleTree

[Twentyfirst]

17 minutes ago, PurpleTree said:

Like Norway, Ireland, Denmark, Singapore, Finland for example?

Aren't they the original vikings? Meaning all they knew how to do was rape, pillage, and build boats?

[Leo Gura]

13 minutes ago, Twentyfirst said:

But you make it seem like the West created values such as human rights or freedom. As if ancient societies just didn't know human rights existed. But the West are the biggest violators of these rights 

I don't really care who invented them. I just look at which soceities are able to grant those rights to their citizens.

Bottom line is China and Russia have zero freedom of press. They are propaganda machines.

Edited 7 hours ago by Leo Gura

[Twentyfirst]

Just now, Leo Gura said:

I don't really care who invented them. I just look at which soceities are able to grant those rights to their citizens.

Who cares if they grant those rights to their citizens while denying them to other nations citizens that they have no place interfering in

Too much propaganda. In the Western mind this is how they see the rest of the world. If you go to Russia today there will be town squares with slaves in chains at the stage and people buying and selling them with paperwork. In Saudi Arabia the women will be locked in cages on a cart with wheels with a man pulling at it on the sidewalk. In China as soon as a Chinese person sneezes some van will speed over, throw him in, and drive away. In India you can turn on the TV and there is a sport called raping women 

Meanwhile in America so many people are incarcerated, there are school shootings all the time, people are depressed and neurotic, families are breaking up, police are dying, addicts are overdosing, the wealth gap is getting larger, people can't afford basic things or homes (in the richest country), the food is poison, everyone is suing everyone, people don't even know who their neighbors are let alone would be willing to help them, people are isolated and atomized...I don't know. I just don't get it 

So why is it so hard for the USA/Israel to stop colonizing Palestine in 2025 and deny them their rights? It seems like they just can't help it. Like they can't fight the urge to stop doing it. Even if it means damaging themselves. It seems from the outside that it is who they are regardless of any lies they say about not wanting to do 

[Leo Gura]

I am not going to respond to any more arguments about the West not being more developed. I'm done explaining this matter. Never again will I explain it. If you don't get it, good luck.

Edited 7 hours ago by Leo Gura

[PurpleTree]

1 minute ago, Leo Gura said:

I am not going to respond to any more arguments about the West not being more developed. I'm done explaining this matter. Never again will I explain this matter.

It’s useless. These guys come with an agenda/ideology and a victim mentality.

 

[aste]

14 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

I am not going to respond to any more arguments about the West not being more developed. I'm done explaining this matter. Never again will I explain it. If you don't get it, good luck.

 

Yeah I am also done it is useless to make westerners with poor history awareness to realize how vile their foundations are, keep enjoying your well deserved wealth and development and dismissing any alternative perspective in which genocide, slavery and asymetric war is not the most advanced way of being.

[Thought Art]

Patience and recontextualization over time.

[zazen]

6 hours ago, Leo Gura said:

Of course it's different because 3rd world nations are now developing using a different pathway, using 1st world technology, and in a different era, where 1st world development and values already exist. That is very different from developing the 1st world from scratch.

These China examples are not in your favor because China is very bad to its own people. Maybe China is not starting colonial wars, but it has enslaved its own people in insane levels of brainwashing to compensate. Undoing that whole system of propagnda and collective manipulation will take a lot of work.

Yes they are, that’s my point - “3rd worlders” are using 1st world tools in a 1st world way according to 1st world values, to develop in a 1st world era - while the West is using the same tools and institutions to stay dominating the planet and act imperially, including grinding Gaza to dust - are those 1st world values or are they values more reminiscent of a previous eras..

The West’s history and its present actions demonstrate a consistent pattern of abusing power, both domestically and internationally - to exploit, dominate, and devastate.

Not all power is exercised in the same way or has been. Flawed internal governance and domestic issues is a false equivalence to the level of chaos caused by how a nation relates to others which brings about international issues.

Development is a rocky road. US has one of the highest incarceration rates yet still has one of the highest homicide rates. If we are to go by the most basic of rights being safety, or even political stability to avoid polarized politics which has half the population clawing at each other every four years - maybe development occurs differently and that’s okay.

Perhaps other nations are living by 1st world rules and principles better than those whose famous claim to fame are those same rules and principles which they treat as mere suggestions today.

 

 

Arnaud:

“That's the trend that Trump accelerates: almost mechanically, as the US refuses to care for the world's "commons" (health, climate, etc.) China will step up.

That's the great irony of our age: the US, which largely built the post-war order we live in, is increasingly viewing it as a constraint to be shed or even, in Marco Rubio's words during his confirmation hearing, "a weapon being used against us." (foreign.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/…). 

Rubio's words are extraordinary when you think about it, he literally said: "The postwar global order is not just obsolete; it is now a weapon being used against us." You can't think of a bigger indictment of the U.S. itself given that they forged what they now see as a "weapon". It illustrates how profound America's sense of self-doubt and insecurity is, like a parent who comes to fear their own child. And it removes any doubt as to who is the foremost revisionist power in the world today.

Meanwhile China, often seen wrongly as a revisionist power, is very invested in preserving this order. The reason is straightforward: China's rise occurred within this system and through mastering its rules, so they have a deep interest in preserving its core economic and institutional frameworks. That's what the U.S. resents, and it's true it's got to hurt: China is winning the game which rules they devised. And so they want to change the rules, and China doesn't.”

Edited 2 hours ago by zazen

[Leo Gura]

2 minutes ago, zazen said:

grinding Gaza to dust - are those 1st world values ur more reminiscent of a previous eras.

That is Zionist ideology. Which is stage Blue nationalism.

Yes, the West is very bad at handling terrorism, which requires development beyond the West.

Edited 7 hours ago by Leo Gura

[Emerald]

1 hour ago, PurpleTree said:

So how are these countries some of the most barbarous?

Also what do you mean by barbarous? Edit ok i read your explanation/idea.

But i don’t agree with your view at all.

For example Russia. Very “barbarous” in foreign policy yet the populace doesn’t have  that much freedom for self development or how ever you put it.

Or would you say Canada is still very “barbarous” in its foreign policy compared to lets say Iran, North Korea, Somalia?

I'm not saying that all countries with a barbarous foreign policy necessarily create better situations for the populace of the country. That's highly dependent upon how the relationship between the government and the people is structured.

What I am saying is that a nation being powerful and imperialistic tends to be the unfortunate scaffolding that creates the abundance necessary for the populace to take their focus off of surviving and onto more achievement-based and self-actualization based pursuits that benefit their nation of origin.

And this gives the proper infrastructure and frees up more individual human potential to be utilized towards greater levels of autonomy and societal development... in terms of human rights, scientific advancements, technological advancements, and more emphasis on higher pursuits in general.

That said, if a government is very authoritarian towards its own people... that creates another survival concern that takes the populace's focus off off these pursuits. So, material abundance doesn't mitigate the issues of authoritarian rule.

And Canada was only given sovereign status from British rule back in the 80s. So, in very recent history, it was a colony of an imperial power. And it's still currently got the backing of the British military and NATO.

So, Canada is involved in imperialism... which is what I'm referring to as barbarism. And yes, it has conveyed benefits of abundance and first world status to Canada.

But that's not to say that Iran, North Korea, or Somalia are less barbarous.

The framework of the leaders in those nations are almost certainly less world unity focused than those in the most imperialistic nations with the highest levels of barbaric impact. So, you get a weird situation where the most paradigmatically developed up the spiral also create the most harm because they have more power.

So, those three nations you mentioned just don't have as much military power or resources as an imperial power. So, it's accurate to say that their barbarism isn't as wide-reaching as the barbarism in more powerful imperialist nations. It's more contained.

And they must ally themselves with more powerful imperialist nations to have more power.

For example, Saudi Arabia is allied with the United States. Somalia is also a US ally. And North Korea is an ally to China.

So, all of these nations do benefit somewhat from imperialism by connection to a greater military power.

And that does likely confer some material benefits to living there that countries with no imperialist allies don't have access to. And that does potentially set them up for a bump in societal infrastructure development which can take more of the survival burdens off the populace... which can enable higher levels of personal development. (authoritarianism not withstanding as that is a major blocker to human potential that doesn't directly relate to scarcity or the level of societal infrastructure.)

But people from poorer places (even in poorer places in wealthier nations) will tend to have a more conservative and "unkind to outsiders" kind of mentality because they are tuned into survival mode and feelings of scarcity. And authoritarian rulers will appeal most to people who are dealing with scarcity.

So, there tends to be a direct correlation between scarcity and parochial thinking. And parochial thinking tends to lead to a more disconnected and barbaric worldview.

But in the current state of the world, the way to alleviate your populace from the bounds of parochial thinking is to be a dominating force on the world stage.

This is what I mean by something growing out of its opposite. You can't have the flower without the dirt... at least at this juncture in time.

Edited 6 hours ago by Emerald

[Thought Art]

1 hour ago, Leo Gura said:

I don't really care who invented them. I just look at which soceities are able to grant those rights to their citizens.

Bottom line is China and Russia have zero freedom of press. They are propaganda machines.

They are Donald Trump proof 😄.

I honestly don’t know if too much freedom is a good thing. But, again, I’m ignorant and maybe can’t see things. 

I personally like Xi…governance will always be messy. He does something I can’t even imagine. Feeding over a billion people and developing his country. 

Democracy is a double edged sword. The handing over of power as I see what just happened with Trump is such a massive risk. Ideally, I sometimes wonder if one leader making his life’s work ruling a country could be ideal if he is a good leader. Anyway, 

 

I am pro democracy. I just am questioning things since Trump came in. Seeing such a gross weakness of how corruption can destroy democracy…. Just really makes me see how fragile it is. 
 

I have contemplated and expanded this question with ChatGPT. 

Edited 6 hours ago by Thought Art

[LambdaDelta]

It is a simple matter, on a scale of 100 the 3rd world is developed at a 10, the West at like 22. Both are still very low in the big picture, but humanity is young. The claim that the West is more developed is therefore correct. As it is merely a relative truth, it's only valid at this point in time, on this planet. Very limited scope. In 500 years for all we know USA will roll back to stage Red and Africa becomes the economic center of the world. 

Misperceiving it as an absolute is what gets people offended. 

[Twentyfirst]

7 minutes ago, Emerald said:

 

This is what I mean by something growing out of its opposite. You can't have the flower without the dirt... at least at this juncture in time.

All this BS will go out the window once it's your country in the oppressed position. Then you will ask "Why can't we have the flower without the dirt in 2025". You will see how nonsensical it all is

[aste]

10 minutes ago, zazen said:

Yes they are, that’s my point - “3rd worlders” are using 1st world tools in a 1st world

 

Believing there is a 1st 2nd and 3rd world is already worrying... it shows that type of hierarchical thinking very common in colonialists and opressors.

 

10 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

That is Zionist ideology. Which is stage Blue nationalism.

Yes, the West is very bad at handling terrorism.

 

Guess who is behind zionists? Great Britain in the beginning and then USA after WWII.

 

Yes the west is very bad at handling terrorism but they are champions creating the conditions for it to flourish and using it to advance their war agenda that kept them on top for some decades but as everything unfair and irrational is unsustainable and we are now seeing how the boomerang is coming back.

[Thought Art]

@aste like, 80 years ago… stage blue…

Edited 6 hours ago by Thought Art

[Emerald]

7 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

That is Zionist ideology. Which is stage Blue nationalism.

Yes, the West is very bad at handling terrorism, which requires development beyond the West.

@zazen

It isn't just Zionism. That's just the Stage Blue reasoning that's used to get Israeli Stage Blue people on board with the barbarisms of the US and Israel.

You need a story to sell barbarism to the people so that they can rationalize to themselves why it's okay. And Zionism is just the wrapping paper that's being used.

It's similar to how the US used the idea of Manifest Destiny to create a pretty narrative around Native American genocide. That way, the average people could romanticize it and support it without focusing on the reality.

The US also did the same thing with slavery and created a narrative that black people were 3/5 of a person and needed the white masters to civilize and employ and help them through giving them work. This enabled liberal-minded people of the time to rationalize to themselves why slavery is okay.

There's always a narratives you have to feed the people to get them on board so that they don't have to question their own goodness and so that they don't challenge the state's agenda. 

But the people in the government are typically focused on maintaining power and control. And they may use the stories to rationalize their evils to themselves. I'm sure that many people in the Israeli government truly are 'dyed in the wool' Zionists.

But I have no doubt in my mind that the US and most of the government officials aren't the slightest bit interested or invested in Zionist ideology.

Though, they'll pretend to it to convince Americans that they just care about "securing a homeland for Jewish people" and "fighting antisemitism" or the variety of ways they justify it. But that's just to justify it to the people.

The US and Israel have other power-based imperial agendas... which likely have to do with taking control of trade routes and interrupting the potential formation of an Arab empire (of many nations with a common tongue) by having an American ally right in the center of the Middle East.

And the interests of the US are national defense, acquisition of resources, and maintaining it top imperial status... not Zionism.

[Twentyfirst]

You guys on the forum are fine. Typical Westerners. But whatever you do. Do not let yourselves turn into future Jordan Petersons. This level of blindness and arrogance is what the West will make you (regardless of other societies problems) if you allow it to! You can't be actualized like this. No way. Jordan Peterson is the perfect representation of final boss level West (let's call it shadow west for now) and no matter how smart or developed you are you can be severely immature in your thinking 

Edited 6 hours ago by Twentyfirst

[Twentyfirst]

1 hour ago, PurpleTree said:

It’s useless. These guys come with an agenda/ideology and a victim mentality.

 

You gotta think bigger PurpleTree. It's the company you keep. You think we are blaming you directly for all the problems

[Emerald]

17 minutes ago, Twentyfirst said:

All this BS will go out the window once it's your country in the oppressed position. Then you will ask "Why can't we have the flower without the dirt in 2025". You will see how nonsensical it all is

That's also true. I am in an incredibly privileged position to be able to make this observation... like an anthropologist studying the human situation from and objective but distant place.

And it is only in my position of privilege that I can observe it from a more detached and less heart-centered place. And that creates more objectivity but less heart-wisdom if I leave it at that.

This happens often in the way that men can think of women. And men can be more detached because they are not on the chopping block. And I cannot stand it when they think they are more correct because they can look at the situation from a detached more objective view because they do not recognize that they're lacking in the empathy and heart-wisdom.

And it is certainly short-sighted if it's used to excuse these acts of barbarism.

It's always negative to treat people as sacrificial lambs. And we should always be against it as individuals as we need the individuals of a populace to always be pro-people and pro-human development.

Only then, can we actually put the adequate pressure needed to change these imperialist dominator tendencies.

That said, it is true how these dynamics tend to work. Lots of human sacrifice of life and potentials along many factions of the species goes into growing as a species. And I am not on the chopping block in this particular instance because I am from the imperial power with the greatest degree of military might.

So, I do apologize if my perspective is insensitive as I am giving a very detached objective view of the gnarly ways that human societies use and gain power... and how individual people end up as sacrificial lambs of the process.