Tuesday, March 15, 2011

Roger Waters on Riz Khan

I finally got around to listening to this. I'm so glad I did. The interview leaves one hopeful and encouraged, despite the seriousness and urgency of the horror that is the Israeli Occupation itself. A deep thanks to Roger Waters and all of those artists like him.

Without further ado:


Doug Plumb said...

When the wall came down, red spilled out everywhere. It had the opposite affect to what most believed (imagine that). I never understood why it upset so many people I knew in the arts and humanities until I started educating myself on the red menace.

Magdelena said...

Doug, not sure what you are talking about? How does this relate to Roger?

Doug Plumb said...

Hes been wrong before about walls.

Doug Plumb said...

When I read Ralston Sauls "Unconscious Civilization" I was very impressed with his ideas, as I was with Voltaires Bastards.

But then I learned Saul was an environmentalist and that he therefore cannot be trusted. Waters is an anti Global Warming (Rockefeller) environmentalist.

Waters says a lot of things I dissagree with - one, a popular misconception is that if we do away with the current political way things are we will have to lower our standard of living. I don't understand how fewer wars and less bloodshed will accomplish this - in fact I think we will have much more stuff but also recognise it as less important. The status of having a Mercedes will not exist so much.

The idea that we have less stuff and have to work harder if the current order is done away with is false, but echoed everywhere - usually casually as a tertiary point and due to this, poorly considered and accepted as fact. William Griggs (LibertyRadio) does this too. Its one key I use to ID the fake left or the poorly informed.

Magdelena said...

I think the ones who have to 'lower' their standard of living are those who have far too much to begin with. CEOs, Bankers, the 'elites', choose your label for em, there's a myriad of choices.

With regards to Walls, they can be many things metaphorically. We all build them inside ourselves, for various reasons. One can look at The Wall in many ways, personally, emotionally, politically.

I'm really still not sure why you have a problem with tearing down some of these walls. Surely many of them must shatter before we, as in the collection of humanity, can move forward? Religious walls, currency walls, spiritual walls, legal walls?

Just rambling now, but still am confused why you don't like Waters.

Anonymous said...

Maggie, its me responding here (love that phrase "its me"- can't log Onto Google Accounts right now.

Waters did a concert after the collapse of the wall to celebrate it.

I thought we would enter an era of peace - I was always anti war (hot or cold). Humanities students explained to me that the wall coming down would have the opposite affect - red (communism) would spill out all over the world. They were right - environmentalism and sustainable development entered the phase of going public - a necessary phase for completion. Being an engineering student at the time I did not understand the big machine that surrounds us.

Up until this point the law of the world has always been based on the devine rights of man rather than the devine rights of kings, this because of our belief in free will which is itself a consequence of the existence of some God. Without believing in God you cannot believe in freewill - everything is determined by its previous state starting from the Big Bang. There is no freewill in the scientific view of the world. Everything is deterministic and has a cause. (a causal universe)

Determinism, which has its logical seed in evolutionary theory is what communists need to get everyone to "go along to get along" rather than assert their natural rights- (everything is predetermined anyways so why bother ?). This is why evolutionary theory is being pushed in the communist schools. It leads to determinism.

So we do need walls to protect us from those who would trample on the devine rights of man.

Albert Camus explains this so well in "The Rebel" or "The Fastidious Assassins" - same book different title (100 pages but difficult). Kant also explains the dangers and the fundamental errors involved with a deterministic belief wrt the cosmological questions. Kant uses pure reason to explain the consequence of adapting pure reason as a universal tool for thought in the Critique Of Pure Reason (easy to read, hard to understand, easy to misunderstand- a serious study in itself). Camus uses experience and reason to say the same thing as Kant - (Kant just uses pure logic independent of experience). Plato also explains what happens in a world without God in The Republic.

Ultimately Camus is an existentialist which means we determine our own existence by our own thoughts. Kant was an idealist which means we should see the world as how it should be rather than how it is (going along to get along). Plato just explained that evil men intoxicated with sophistry & licentiousness take over the position of God.

Fundamentally the wall coming down was a win against the devine rights of man and for efficiency of the machine and the devine right of kings.

I cannot find some of my posts on Google anymore. My machine somehow got infected with Babylon and I can't get rid of it. If you can, do a search on "Doug Plumb Phalgellum Bacteria" to see a great (really, really cool graphics and science) movie on evolution vs intelligent design, also search " licentiousness, sophistry, intimidation, Plato, courts" to see the relevant section that I copied from Plato's Republic.

There is just a lot to explain here on why I don't like Waters and I can't explain it the way I'd like to. I've been wanting to write a book for a few years now, I'm getting close to writing "The Nature Of Environmentalism" which would explain the battle between those who believe in the devine rights of man and those who believe in the devine right of kings. The wall protected US from THEM and will always be necessary to protect our natural right.

Anonymous said...

Me again,

I HATE multiculturalism. It destroys tradition and therefore divine right. It destroys families through ethical differences and in-fighting.

Ships have walls to protect unflooded compartments from flooded ones, walls are necessary.

Take Palestine for instance, if the wall comes down, every man woman and child in Israel will be subject to constant naked body scans, Michael "son of the devil" Chertoff will get even richer.

Israeli citizens are just like us, they face this red machine that wants to destroy their divine right as well. A loss of their rights is an eventual impingement on yours and mine.

We must fix our compartment so that the things in our compartment that cause the flooding in the Palestinian compartment can be stopped.

Protesting G-20, Palestinian rights abuses and everything else is nothing more than a mad rush to bow down before our masters and give the police and military practice. We lose every time, they get more hardened every time. They need the practice whipping us.

We need to fight only battles that we can win. This means the courts and voting. If everyone got on the same page and actually "threw the bums out" it would work ! But the red machine has destroyed faith in the political system - the only place where people can win.

Free speech is the answer as Camus says, its the only answer.