Date: Wed 27 Nov 2002 - 20:41:17 GMT
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Scott Chase" <email@example.com>
> > Kenneth might not realize that we're supposed to have a separation
> > of
> > and state over here. The religious right may not like that idea very
> > much, but so be it. I have my own agnostic reservations about "one
> > nation under God" or "in God we trust", but don't lose any sleep
> > over it. If Pat Robertson or any of his ilk ever becomes president,
> > that's when I start worrying.
> Scott, Jon,
> My point along was, has been, is and will be that underneath the US,
> and I suspect in an equal sense underneath Europe a religious bias is
> running free. But IMO, the one underneath the US is stronger, more
> active so to speak. Memetic like, the foreign policy of the US is IMO
> based within that religious thought.
> I just want to see which kind of memeset is running underneath the US
> and how and in what way that opposites the set of Europe and thus how
> and why Europe is so contrary.
> It may be that there is a supposed separation of church and politics
> in the US, and again I suspect in an equal sense in Europe ( although
> that prooves in many cases not to be), but I think, call it a gut
> feeling, that religion and the American constitution is intertwined in
> such ways that the tokens of belief always are counted in_ the one can
> 't get around without the other so the speak, where IMO, in Europe
> such things are gone. In cases of abortion of euthanisia still
> religion plays its markers but those came finally through.
> There is a sense of ' belief' call it religion if you like in the US,
> call it selfesteem, that ain 't be found in Europe. And IMO, and that
> is what I tried to explain to Joe, is the difference in approach and
> why we, Europe is so contrary. There is a difference of ' belief ',
> and still IMO that belief is biased on a real religious ground.
> IIRC, the US, as the plural, was it William James ?, correct me if I
> am wrong, is biased on Lamarckism for its politics or something, have
> to check it..... And Lamarckism stands for " creation ", and if this
> might be true, IMO, the foreign polticy of the US is prejudiced.....
The idea that the policy differences between the US and Europe can be explained (or explained away) by appealing to a religious domination of the US by the Christian fundies seems to be a runaway meme in Europe, especially for those who have never lived in the US and thus do not know how fallacious such an idea is. Perhaps losing 3000 people in 9/11 woke the US up to the realities of the situation more than it did the still-slumbering euros. Or, quite possibly, they are frightened and intimidated by their own indigenous Radical Muslim populations into refusing to stand by a beleaguered friend who has saved them more than once in the past, and at great cost. There is indeed the possibility that European countries are being terroristically blackmailed into their positions by the subtextual threat of massive violence from their much larger Radical Muslim populations. Thus it would be the euros' foreign policy, and not that of the US, which might be in greater thrall to a militant religious minority, and be prejudiced as a result. But there are more geopolitical reasons, too. Read the following essay to inform yourself regarding some of them. http://www.policyreview.org/JUN02/kagan.html
> 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 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)
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed 27 Nov 2002 - 20:43:38 GMT