Political Crossfire Forums

cassandrabandra · Joined: 03 Dec 2005 Posts: 853

Reason wrote:

Yeah it was the Hindus, Sikhs, Jews and economists who flew into the twin towers.....and it's them we see on tv calling us evil and threatening to wipe us all out....sure just tell yourself anything so that everything will be the same, I mean if Muslims do something bad then it can't be their culture that is rotten by that everybodies culture is rotten and that everybody does bad things ..blah..postmodernism...blah

LOL reason, you are showing an incredible lack of reason in response to my post. Are you really unaware that 'fundamentalism' isn't limited to Muslim extremists and evangelical Christians?

And you CAN have economic fundamentalism ... many Marxists have been classified as such in the past ... but more recently the 'other side' of economics is showing its ideology to be based on a very narrow understanding of human societies.... where economic considerations fundamentally overrule any capacity to understand social or other factors important to the functioning of society. It has been argued that since the seventies we have been moving away from societies to economies, and this may be one of the factors fuelling global ethno religious conflicts.

Robin Hood · Joined: 14 Sep 2005 Posts: 3295

Quote: LOL reason, you are showing an incredible lack of reason in response to my post. Are you really unaware that 'fundamentalism' isn't limited to Muslim extremists and evangelical Christians?

Totally, I simply rejected your use of it with 'economics', a diverse and wide-ranging subject.

Quote: And you CAN have economic fundamentalism ... many Marxists have been classified as such in the past ...

They would be Marxist fundies, not economics fundies.

Quote: but more recently the 'other side' of economics is showing its ideology to be based on a very narrow understanding of human societies....

Can you give this mysterious force a name?

Quote: where economic considerations fundamentally overrule any capacity to understand social or other factors important to the functioning of society.

again this is just a random set of assertions, but now it is worse. You ahve stated that people forget social factors in reference to society, which means liteally that you reckon people are ignoring societal issues in relation to society! Wow! As for 'other actors' what are they? And as for talking about economists can you name them, say what type they are or actually say anything with any meaning at all?

Think, don't just post the flotsam that is generated by the unthinkin members of society...
Quote:
It has been argued that since the seventies we have been moving away from societies to economies, and this may be one of the factors fuelling global ethno religious conflicts.

The economy and society are not substitutes....you always have both (well unless there's jsut one person).

cassandrabandra · Joined: 03 Dec 2005 Posts: 853

Reason wrote:
Totally, I simply rejected your use of it with 'economics', a diverse and wide-ranging subject.

so you DO think it is restricted to Muslims and Christians?

Quote:
They would be Marxist fundies, not economics fundies.

no, Marxism at one stage was frequently derided as being a form of economic fundamentalism

Quote: Can you give this mysterious force a name?

right side economic ideology, reason. it has several strains

Quote: again this is just a random set of assertions, but now it is worse. You ahve stated that people forget social factors in reference to society, which means liteally that you reckon people are ignoring societal issues in relation to society! Wow! As for 'other actors' what are they? And as for talking about economists can you name them, say what type they are or actually say anything with any meaning at all?

economists too frequently simplify human behaviours into the quantitative alone. Even basic concepts such as 'rational economic man' ignore the myriad factors which contribute to human decision making. Many of the decisions that are made by international agencies such as the IMF and World Bank have ignored the importance of the social reality of the decisions they have enforced on poorer nations - with catastrophic consequences.

I think you should probably find Wheen's book quite interesting.

Quote:
The economy and society are not substitutes....you always have both (well unless there's jsut one person).

True. which is why ignoring the social impact of economic decisions is such a concern.

wsknsn · Joined: 02 Apr 2006 Posts: 5

SOON i see USA loser in the war on terror ( u can see the news coming from iraq & afghanistan...) + IRAN become stronger (nuclear...+missilies...) + palistinians new gouvernement of HAMAS
AL QAEDA + AL JIHAD + HIZBU LLAH IN LIBANON + THE NEW EGYPTE with the musilm's brother's ...........
sooooooooooooooooooISRAELoooVSoooALJIHADoooooooooooooooooon

Robin Hood · Joined: 14 Sep 2005 Posts: 3295

Quote: so you DO think it is restricted to Muslims and Christians?

No, nor have I given you any reason to make you think that.

Quote: no, Marxism at one stage was frequently derided as being a form of economic fundamentalism

That would be by people misusing language, just like you are now.

Quote: right side economic ideology, reason. it has several strains

I get the impression you don't have ths slightest clue what you're talking about. Subjective economics would be the least statist strain, I suppose the type you most dislike, I'm not sure if anyone who knew anything would call it 'narrow'.

Quote: Many of the decisions that are made by international agencies such as the IMF and World Bank have ignored the importance of the social reality of the decisions they have enforced on poorer nations - with catastrophic consequences.

'The social reality' meaning simply what's happening in that society? Do you have any specific examples, 'm sure there are some but your language is so vague that it seems to be put there just to cloud your lack of knoweldge.

Quote: True. which is why ignoring the social impact of economic decisions is such a concern.

I said this: The economy and society are not substitutes....you always have both (well unless there's jsut one person).

Trying to communicate the fact that the two are the same thing, at least from the school of economics I'd argue from.

Saracen · Joined: 01 Dec 2005 Posts: 16629 Location: On Earth

Umm... Reason? This thread died several months ago.

Saracen · Joined: 01 Dec 2005 Posts: 16629 Location: On Earth

gary the cheater wrote: jihad v. mcworld, clash of civilizations, the end of history. all required reading for a first year international relations course.

one thing these theories have in common is they are grossly over-simplified. they present themselves as paradigms for understanding the post-cold war era. the way we understood the previous era as a conflict between capitalist individualism and socialism.

however, these paradigms all grossly overlook the transition from idealism to realpolitik that has taken place since the soviet withdrawal. in their eagerness for universality, they not only overlook several exceptions, but appear as blatant apologists for the new american unilateralism that has appeared in the new system

foreigners are not all tribalist hotheads despite barber's attempts to portray them as such. the united states routinely gets mixed up in regional quarrels even going so far as to form alliances with such unlikely partners as a medieval dictatorship in saudi arabia, much to the regret of huntington's arguments. and while there are still a few states that haven't adopted the american capitalist model, others have backtracked, since fukuyama's book appeared.

the whole mcworld thesis that these regional civilizations are inherently antagonistic to modern civilization smacks of racism. and i have to agree with lancaster's summary of the situation in the middle east that islam is not anti-modern as the author may choose to see it. they are anti-imperialist, whehter you choose to call it as that or mcworld.

Excellent post.