Received: by alpheratz.cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk id TAA23627 (8.6.9/5.3[ref pg@gmsl.co.uk] for cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk from fmb-bounces@mmu.ac.uk); Mon, 1 Oct 2001 19:44:30 +0100 Message-ID: <002301c148fc$0dabb5c0$77a0bed4@default> From: "Kenneth Van Oost" <Kenneth.Van.Oost@village.uunet.be> To: "memetics" <memetics@mmu.ac.uk> Subject: Fw: state of memes Date: Sat, 29 Sep 2001 17:32:38 +0200 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2314.1300 X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2314.1300 Sender: fmb-bounces@mmu.ac.uk Precedence: bulk Reply-To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
----- Original Message -----
From: Kenneth Van Oost <Kenneth.Van.Oost@village.uunet.be>
To: <memetics@mmu.ac.uk>
Sent: Saturday, September 29, 2001 1:05 PM
Subject: Re: state of memes
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Scott Chase <ecphoric@hotmail.com>
> > I've no major qualms about an elaborate missile defense network. I'm
still
> > quite concerned about China and about states such as North Korea which
> could
> > eventually launch an attack as far away as the Pacific seaboard of the
> U.S.
> > The technological spin-offs (serendipity?) of such an undertaking could
> > carry over into non-military realms. My major problem is with the price
> tag.
> > I've also got issues with irresponsible tax cuts being enacted during
the
> > same period of time there's an expensive military build-up. A missile
> > defense network won't prevent domestic terrorism but it could curtail
long
> > range engagements.
>
> Hi Scott,
>
> I don 't know but from my POV you are missing an important part of the
> equation here !
> I understand your concerns about what Bush is planning to secure the
> US, but don 't you think that beneath the reason of security there are
> lying others, more important ones !? The ones that now pop up in every
> American his/ her mind !? That in a way, you already answered the WHY
> question, in your mind !?
>
> Why would you be afraid of China and of North- Korea if not you
> have reasons to believe you do !? You think that the American culture
> is thé culture and you enforced this view upon others. But like Islam
> your proud turned into arrogance. It goes wrong when you connect
> a beliefsystem onto politics. The US beliefs strongly in democracy,
> freedom, humanrights, equality, etc ... but not all do the same.
> They do, but not the American- style.
>
> Values of freedom and equality are rightly fundamental basisblocks
> of our society, but concepts like zero- tolerance undermine the thought
> of freedom itself. Don 't forget, the US is built upon slavery, those
> thoughts and what kind of behaviorcharacteristics did lead from there
> are still in place.
>
> Like I did mention earlier on this list, the US, Islam, Europe and all
> others are fixed in the way they all think_ memetic determinism
> is according to the views of Huntington a direct result of our various
> ethocentric civilizations. Each block, West, Islam,...has it very own
> cultural habits to perform. We, the West with our technological
> development goes mush faster than the rest, but we have to act so
> that we " protect " the others.
>
> That is something we cannot do, our memetic determinism implies
> a necessity to " destroy " others, to " steal " from them, to enforce
> our views upon them so that we can go on.
> The solution would be of course, that we take the others into our
> account and help them to develop further. But, again, memetical
> we are blocked to do that. Such ideas are ' Green ' ones, are anti-
> globalist- ones and those will not do.
>
> In a way, giving in on the anti- globalist movement would be taking
> one step back and we wan' t above all to go one step beyond the
> limits we all know now. The results are quite explosive, literally.
> From our point of view, bringing for example black Africa upon
> the rate of development as we know it, would be catastrofical
> for the worlds environment. That is what we think !
> But does it !? Yes, if we take our numbers into account, but do have
> impartial numbers to back up another view !? No !!
>
> That is what I mean. We need not to change the world, not the exterior
> factors but we need to change the interior.
> Again, that is a " Green "-peace- view, not an one I very like, but
> we have to make another step for a higher development. Now we are
> stuck on our well known certain level, we need to go beyond that.
>
> Regards,
>
> Kenneth
>
> ( I am, because we are) the way we think
>
===============================================================
This was distributed via the memetics list associated with the
Journal of Memetics - Evolutionary Models of Information Transmission
For information about the journal and the list (e.g. unsubscribing)
see: http://www.cpm.mmu.ac.uk/jom-emit
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon Oct 01 2001 - 19:55:14 BST