Received: by alpheratz.cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk id TAA23709 (8.6.9/5.3[ref firstname.lastname@example.org] for cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk from email@example.com); Mon, 1 Oct 2001 19:56:57 +0100 Message-ID: <000001c149df$d01bc4e0$8601bed4@default> From: "Kenneth Van Oost" <Kenneth.Van.Oost@village.uunet.be> To: "memetics" <firstname.lastname@example.org> Subject: Fw: state of memes Date: Sun, 30 Sep 2001 20:36:44 +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: email@example.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: firstname.lastname@example.org
----- Original Message -----
From: Kenneth Van Oost <Kenneth.Van.Oost@village.uunet.be>
To: memetics <email@example.com>
Sent: Saturday, September 29, 2001 5:32 PM
Subject: Fw: state of memes
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Kenneth Van Oost <Kenneth.Van.Oost@village.uunet.be>
> To: <firstname.lastname@example.org>
> Sent: Saturday, September 29, 2001 1:05 PM
> Subject: Re: state of memes
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: Scott Chase <email@example.com>
> > > I've no major qualms about an elaborate missile defense network. I'm
> > > 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
> > > carry over into non-military realms. My major problem is with the
> > tag.
> > > I've also got issues with irresponsible tax cuts being enacted during
> > > same period of time there's an expensive military build-up. A missile
> > > defense network won't prevent domestic terrorism but it could curtail
> > > 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)
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon Oct 01 2001 - 20:02:20 BST