All of us, every single man, woman, and child on the face of the Earth were born with the same unalienable rights; to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. And, if the governments of the world can't get that through their thick skulls, then, regime change will be necessary.
Monday, June 07, 2010
Simon Deng - Culturist or Racist??
Simon Deng was a featured speaker at the rally to STOP THE 9 - 11 MOSQUE. After he spoke to a reporter and I recorded it. I think he is a rival to PAT CONDELL !!
what is Deng's foreign policy? upon which the video 'author' does not agree? -could find nothing on google search--- before I 'swipe' this-I need to know--- BTW-this video and my quick research leads me to respect Deng... C-CS
Culturist John does not believe in fighting wars overseas to defeat Islam. He believes that Muslims have a right to enslave women, and kill gays, apostates, and adulterers.
They have a right to do that, because it is their Culture. And, they achieved their culture by killing tens of millions of Christians and Jews, so they can do what they want, according to John.
Who are we to tell them "No".
I love John, but I disagree with him on this point.
I'm sure he can fill in the nuances that I left out in this summary of his ideas.
I certainly don't agree with John's extreme moral relativism either, but I have to admit that he choose a good video to post here and on his site, except for fact that I found it kind of hard to hear, with all the shouting in the background.
Thanks Pastorius- Found the Mr. Deng is a Christian- who refused to give up his faith-even w/in the 'slave' environ-so-if it's OK -I'll 'swipe' the video and write my own take- (in a day or two) ---giving CJ and IBA an h/t -of course.... C-CS
Damien, I agree with that Deng is a great potential leader, a la Pat Condell. He's probably a much better potential leader for our movement, because while Condell is a serious man, there is a very snide air about him. Deng, on the other hand, has the sincerity of a man who has faced death for his beliefs.
Thanks for the appreciation of the video. He was speaking for a while. He is a great and fluid orator. Everyone does their speil on stage and are okay. He speaks eloquently, passionately, etc. endlessly. He is a found of good print.
In terms of foreign policy, I think Pastorius you summarize my stuff with a lots of truth and little nuance. I simply do not see horror and more horror constantly and 24 hours a day in all Islamic nations. I don't know what "defeat Islam" means. It is a huge religion with many believers.
And, if you want to defeat Islam, I think the best way is to take care of America. For example, Saddam Hussein was a bad man. Should we then spend half a trillion dollars replacing him and rebuilding their economy? Perhaps his regime was none of our business.
In terms of the other comment, if it is our job to rule the world and overthrow governments in the name of our morals, perhaps even including China, that is a globalist view. I am not a globalist. So, yes, culturism is against globalism.
Thanks again for commenting on the video all. It is good to know that some folks watched it. And, everyone is welcome to take excerpts and do what they wish with it.
First of all, I frame the question that way because the politicians are calling us "bigots" for sure and that is somewhat synonymous with racists.
The first speaker who was not an organizer spoke of how insulting that was to him as the father in law of a Korean girl and the grandfather of a mixed blood child both killed in 9 - 11.
It seems whenever we mention cultural differences, we are called bigots or racists. Do you not agree?
That is an interesting question. If we are discussing international policy, I would put him as a Christian western ally. So if deciding to enter a war between Muslims and Christians, I would choose Christians. To this extent he is a fellow Christian against Muslims.
In terms of immigration, however, I do not know enough about Christian Sudanese culture give specifics. but, if there were a clash between his Sudanese culture and ours, I would hope he'd side with American cultural practices and beliefs. They do, after all, exist.
And Pastorius, though I never can tell if you are serious or just pissing on me, it is not our culture to just go around smashing totalitarian governments around the world. I am just about to publish an article on George Washington as a culturist. He warned against foreign entanglements. And we held to that tradition from our founding until after forced into WW II.
CJ, You said: It seems whenever we mention cultural differences, we are called bigots or racists. Do you not agree?
I say: Oh yes, definitely. However, this is a distinction on which I am not confused. My family, after all, looks like the United Nations. Therefore, the difference between culture and race is very clear to me.
As far as the question of whether Simon Deng is a Sudanese Christian Culturist, or more generally, a Western Christian Culturist, I'd say I don't have enough information to have an opinion.
CJ, You said: it is not our culture to just go around smashing totalitarian governments around the world.
I say; Well, that may be true, as an absolute statement. But, I think you and I agree, it would have been better if America had bombed Auschwitz. Additionally, I believe it is a good thing that we stopped buying oil from Iran and Iraq. That was an economic act of war. In the case of Iraq, we did not go back to buying oil from them, until we deposed the Hussein Regime. In other words, the economic act of war served as a just warning and a precursor of real physical war. In other words, Iraq's bad behavior led to real consequences from the United States, and I am glad they did.
On the other hand, culturally, it would have been better had the United States actually used it's blueprint for winning a war, which we established in the American Civil WAr, and in the WWII wars against Germany and Japan.
We remade those societies, and thank God we did.
We could have just gone in and busted them up, but instead, we made the effort to remake their societies in our image. That was an act of Cultural Imperialism to the extreme.
Actually, Pastorius, I know you often come back to WW II. And I tell you I think Muslim nations are really different. So we disagree.
So tell me, we are already in Iraq and Afghanistan turning them into democracies. What are the top 5 other nations you would have us invade right now and transform into democracies.
And since we are dealing with non-Western nations, what is your criteria? China has no democracy, freedom of speech, or prisoner rights. And they are huge. Would you start with them? Or would you invade a small, worse nation like Sudan first? Would it be for 20 honor killing a year we invade or does it just have to be government backed systematic violations of "human rights" that impact the whole population? Would it be for rigged elections? Will we invade over poor housing conditions or prison abuse?
So which ones and why? Give me some targets.
While we're at it, some cost estimates and exit strategies would be good. When they have no honor killing for a year do we leave the country? Would three years of elections in China do it?
CJ, We are not doing what we need to do to turn Iraq and Afghanistan into Democracies.
I've been writing this blog and CUANAS since 2004. My record of explaining what I thought needed to be done to turn Afghanistan and Iraq into Democracies is extensive. You can look it up. I've been saying the same thing for a very long time. We are not doing what we need to do.
Therefore, when you say, Iraq and Afghanistan are different, I have to say, Yes, they are different. But, they are no more insane and murderous than was Japan. And, we succeeded with Japan.
But, we haven't done to a single Muslim country any of the things we did to get Japan where it is now.
That does not mean you are wrong, but the point is, I could very well be right.
I think I am.
You know why?
Because I think humans are humans, and the only thing that is different from one group of humans to another is the set of ideas to which they ascribe.
My wife, for instance, is from the Phillipines (as you know). Just a few hundred years back, her people were like American Indians.
Now, Filipino people are instant Americans, the most assimilable non-European group of people who do regularly come to be citizens here in the United States.
What made the difference?
Well, to hear my wife's family tell it, it was Cultural Imperialism, both military and ideologically, and much of the ideological imperialism was carried out by MISSIONARIES.
Have we done any of that with the Arab world?
No.
You know, it might be wise to look at the blueprint for success before we set out to do something.
What we are doing in Iraq and Afghanistan, the way we are doing it, has not ever worked before.
We reinvented the wheel, and what do you know, a square wheel doesn't work very well.
17 comments:
what is Deng's foreign policy? upon which the video 'author' does not agree? -could find nothing on google search---
before I 'swipe' this-I need to know---
BTW-this video and my quick research leads me to respect Deng...
C-CS
How far are we going to barricade ourselves?
Well, that's the price we pay for the luxury of living with Muslims.
Christian Soldier,
To answer your question:
Culturist John does not believe in fighting wars overseas to defeat Islam. He believes that Muslims have a right to enslave women, and kill gays, apostates, and adulterers.
They have a right to do that, because it is their Culture. And, they achieved their culture by killing tens of millions of Christians and Jews, so they can do what they want, according to John.
Who are we to tell them "No".
I love John, but I disagree with him on this point.
I'm sure he can fill in the nuances that I left out in this summary of his ideas.
Pastorius,
I certainly don't agree with John's extreme moral relativism either, but I have to admit that he choose a good video to post here and on his site, except for fact that I found it kind of hard to hear, with all the shouting in the background.
Thanks Pastorius-
Found the Mr. Deng is a Christian-
who refused to give up his faith-even w/in the 'slave' environ-so-if it's OK -I'll 'swipe' the video and write my own take- (in a day or two) ---giving CJ and IBA an h/t -of course....
C-CS
Christian Soldier,
Deng is a very strong and very brave man. There are people who would have committed suicide if they had went through much of what he went through.
Damien,
I agree with that Deng is a great potential leader, a la Pat Condell. He's probably a much better potential leader for our movement, because while Condell is a serious man, there is a very snide air about him. Deng, on the other hand, has the sincerity of a man who has faced death for his beliefs.
Hey All,
Thanks for the appreciation of the video. He was speaking for a while. He is a great and fluid orator. Everyone does their speil on stage and are okay. He speaks eloquently, passionately, etc. endlessly. He is a found of good print.
In terms of foreign policy, I think Pastorius you summarize my stuff with a lots of truth and little nuance. I simply do not see horror and more horror constantly and 24 hours a day in all Islamic nations. I don't know what "defeat Islam" means. It is a huge religion with many believers.
And, if you want to defeat Islam, I think the best way is to take care of America. For example, Saddam Hussein was a bad man. Should we then spend half a trillion dollars replacing him and rebuilding their economy? Perhaps his regime was none of our business.
In terms of the other comment, if it is our job to rule the world and overthrow governments in the name of our morals, perhaps even including China, that is a globalist view. I am not a globalist. So, yes, culturism is against globalism.
Thanks again for commenting on the video all. It is good to know that some folks watched it. And, everyone is welcome to take excerpts and do what they wish with it.
John
So, is he a racist or is he talking about culture?
John
He's a Culturist, if those are the two choices.
But, is he a Christian culturist, a Sudanese Culturist, or an American Culturist?
Pastorius,
First of all, I frame the question that way because the politicians are calling us "bigots" for sure and that is somewhat synonymous with racists.
The first speaker who was not an organizer spoke of how insulting that was to him as the father in law of a Korean girl and the grandfather of a mixed blood child both killed in 9 - 11.
It seems whenever we mention cultural differences, we are called bigots or racists. Do you not agree?
That is an interesting question. If we are discussing international policy, I would put him as a Christian western ally. So if deciding to enter a war between Muslims and Christians, I would choose Christians. To this extent he is a fellow Christian against Muslims.
In terms of immigration, however, I do not know enough about Christian Sudanese culture give specifics. but, if there were a clash between his Sudanese culture and ours, I would hope he'd side with American cultural practices and beliefs. They do, after all, exist.
Thanks, John
And Pastorius, though I never can tell if you are serious or just pissing on me, it is not our culture to just go around smashing totalitarian governments around the world. I am just about to publish an article on George Washington as a culturist. He warned against foreign entanglements. And we held to that tradition from our founding until after forced into WW II.
John
CJ,
You said: It seems whenever we mention cultural differences, we are called bigots or racists. Do you not agree?
I say: Oh yes, definitely. However, this is a distinction on which I am not confused. My family, after all, looks like the United Nations. Therefore, the difference between culture and race is very clear to me.
As far as the question of whether Simon Deng is a Sudanese Christian Culturist, or more generally, a Western Christian Culturist, I'd say I don't have enough information to have an opinion.
I'm glad he's in our foxhole, however.
:)
CJ,
You said: it is not our culture to just go around smashing totalitarian governments around the world.
I say; Well, that may be true, as an absolute statement. But, I think you and I agree, it would have been better if America had bombed Auschwitz. Additionally, I believe it is a good thing that we stopped buying oil from Iran and Iraq. That was an economic act of war. In the case of Iraq, we did not go back to buying oil from them, until we deposed the Hussein Regime. In other words, the economic act of war served as a just warning and a precursor of real physical war. In other words, Iraq's bad behavior led to real consequences from the United States, and I am glad they did.
On the other hand, culturally, it would have been better had the United States actually used it's blueprint for winning a war, which we established in the American Civil WAr, and in the WWII wars against Germany and Japan.
We remade those societies, and thank God we did.
We could have just gone in and busted them up, but instead, we made the effort to remake their societies in our image. That was an act of Cultural Imperialism to the extreme.
I am for such Cultural Imperialism.
Especially against the Islamic world.
Actually, Pastorius, I know you often come back to WW II. And I tell you I think Muslim nations are really different. So we disagree.
So tell me, we are already in Iraq and Afghanistan turning them into democracies. What are the top 5 other nations you would have us invade right now and transform into democracies.
And since we are dealing with non-Western nations, what is your criteria? China has no democracy, freedom of speech, or prisoner rights. And they are huge. Would you start with them? Or would you invade a small, worse nation like Sudan first? Would it be for 20 honor killing a year we invade or does it just have to be government backed systematic violations of "human rights" that impact the whole population? Would it be for rigged elections? Will we invade over poor housing conditions or prison abuse?
So which ones and why? Give me some targets.
While we're at it, some cost estimates and exit strategies would be good. When they have no honor killing for a year do we leave the country? Would three years of elections in China do it?
CJ,
We are not doing what we need to do to turn Iraq and Afghanistan into Democracies.
I've been writing this blog and CUANAS since 2004. My record of explaining what I thought needed to be done to turn Afghanistan and Iraq into Democracies is extensive. You can look it up. I've been saying the same thing for a very long time. We are not doing what we need to do.
Therefore, when you say, Iraq and Afghanistan are different, I have to say, Yes, they are different. But, they are no more insane and murderous than was Japan. And, we succeeded with Japan.
But, we haven't done to a single Muslim country any of the things we did to get Japan where it is now.
That does not mean you are wrong, but the point is, I could very well be right.
I think I am.
You know why?
Because I think humans are humans, and the only thing that is different from one group of humans to another is the set of ideas to which they ascribe.
My wife, for instance, is from the Phillipines (as you know). Just a few hundred years back, her people were like American Indians.
Now, Filipino people are instant Americans, the most assimilable non-European group of people who do regularly come to be citizens here in the United States.
What made the difference?
Well, to hear my wife's family tell it, it was Cultural Imperialism, both military and ideologically, and much of the ideological imperialism was carried out by MISSIONARIES.
Have we done any of that with the Arab world?
No.
You know, it might be wise to look at the blueprint for success before we set out to do something.
What we are doing in Iraq and Afghanistan, the way we are doing it, has not ever worked before.
We reinvented the wheel, and what do you know, a square wheel doesn't work very well.
Post a Comment