Diane Abbott

[dad_of_jon]

I didn't know who Edwina Curry was, she certainly put the cat among the chickens. What people believe, it was on the news, it was in the papers, must be true! No wonder Murdoch is one of the most powerful men on the planet.
People are gullible, religion, surpassed its expectations. Seems ridiculous now people believing that women were made from a rib of a man. But the gullibility still continues, market something enough and people will buy it. bottled water. Why people buy that I will never know, unless they are in some Asian country where the water is undrinkable to westerners.

I can kind of understand about that rib of a man during more uneducated times, (that seems to me to be a way of explaining cloning to a primative man and would suggest an intelligent race of beings having come into contact with our more ignorant ancestors), but to make a religion out of it? Bizarre. We have advanced in knowing that we orbit the sun rather than the other way around.

and yet a part of society seems to becoming less educated. I'm not sure the exact cause of that.

 

[foxy]

I can kind of understand about that rib of a man during more uneducated times, (that seems to me to be a way of explaining cloning to a primative man and would suggest an intelligent race of beings having come into contact with our more ignorant ancestors), but to make a religion out of it? Bizarre. We have advanced in knowing that we orbit the sun rather than the other way around.

and yet a part of society seems to becoming less educated. I'm not sure the exact cause of that.

Genetic traits die hard, why are we racist? Why do we bully? Both served a purpose back in the day, a different race was potential danger, Bullying, animals carry it out as a matter of course, so did we it was about survival of the fittest, toughen up or die. All these things don't disappear easily. Even gullibility can be traced back to when we first left the trees, each and everyone of us are susceptible to it, apart from the dyed in the wool sceptics.

 

[Clarence]

I can kind of understand about that rib of a man during more uneducated times, (that seems to me to be a way of explaining cloning to a primative man and would suggest an intelligent race of beings having come into contact with our more ignorant ancestors), but to make a religion out of it? Bizarre. We have advanced in knowing that we orbit the sun rather than the other way around.

and yet a part of society seems to becoming less educated. I'm not sure the exact cause of that.

Nothing to do with Dying Rabbitt, of course, but don't you think the most destructive injunction in the Bible is God's command to man to:

Genesis 1:28 – Then God blessed them, and God said to them, “Be fruitful and multiply; fill the earth and subdue it; have dominion over the fish of the sea, over the birds of the air, and over every living thing that moves on the earth.”

Blind adherence to this alleged command of a blind God is responsible for the excesses of the Industrial Revolution, most individual and corporate greed and ultimatley the climate disaster we're now facing. The adherents to the Hebrew Scriptures (mostly Christians in this instance) have a lot to answer for and so does this so called God. I'll stilck with the gods of Asgaard, thank you. Makes a lot more sense.

How off topic is that???

 

[foxy]

Nothing to do with Dying Rabbitt, of course, but don't you think the most destructive injunction in the Bible is God's command to man to:

Genesis 1:28 – Then God blessed them, and God said to them, “Be fruitful and multiply; fill the earth and subdue it; have dominion over the fish of the sea, over the birds of the air, and over every living thing that moves on the earth.”

Blind adherence to this alleged command of a blind God is responsible for the excesses of the Industrial Revolution, most individual and corporate greed and ultimatley the climate disaster we're now facing. The adherents to the Hebrew Scriptures (mostly Christians in this instance) have a lot to answer for and so does this so called God. I'll stilck with the gods of Asgaard, thank you. Makes a lot more sense.

How off topic is that???

Not far Dianne Abbot is an atheist.

 

[Clarence]

Not far Dianne Abbot is an atheist.

For someone who in post #99 didn't know who she was, you've certainly caught up for lost time.
Since she's of Jamaican extraction, I'd have put her down for a disciple of the late, great Haile Selassie.
Which would explain a lot.
Wonder if it's true.

 

[foxy]

For someone who in post #99 didn't know who she was, you've certainly caught up for lost time.
Since she's of Jamaican extraction, I'd have put her down for a disciple of the late, great Haile Selassie.
Which would explain a lot.
Wonder if it's true.

Edwina Curry I had to Google. I had never heard of her. Though looking at Dianne Abbot's extraction maybe chickens aren't far off the mark.

 

[An Ankoù]

For someone who in post #99 didn't know who she was, you've certainly caught up for lost time.
Since she's of Jamaican extraction, I'd have put her down for a disciple of the late, great Haile Selassie.
Which would explain a lot.
Wonder if it's true.

You're getting a bit giddy, my lad. Read 99 again and lay off the ganja.

 

[Martin Kernick]

Genetic traits die hard, why are we racist? Why do we bully? Both served a purpose back in the day, a different race was potential danger, Bullying, animals carry it out as a matter of course, so did we it was about survival of the fittest, toughen up or die. All these things don't disappear easily. Even gullibility can be traced back to when we first left the trees, each and everyone of us are susceptible to it, apart from the dyed in the wool sceptics.

Interesting post. Humans are capable of both selfishness and selflessness, and I guess the former developed from plain old survival of the fittest. The latter from a more diverse set of evolutionary influences involved in the survival of the group and the development of critical faculties. These possibilities exist in each one of us, in tension, and understanding that goes a long way to understanding the human condition. We are creatures with a choice. We are not compelled to simply think about or protect number one - we can rise above that, and in doing so we can build a society that is better to live in for all. That pretty much sums up the reasoning behind my politics.

 

[foxy]

Interesting post. Humans are capable of both selfishness and selflessness, and I guess the former developed from plain old survival of the fittest. The latter from a more diverse set of evolutionary influences involved in the survival of the group and the development of critical faculties. These possibilities exist in each one of us, in tension, and understanding that goes a long way to understanding the human condition. We are creatures with a choice. We are not compelled to simply think about or protect number one - we can rise above that, and in doing so we can build a society that is better to live in for all. That pretty much sums up the reasoning behind my politics.

Yes everyone is capable of rising above what was a genetic survival instinct, but it is only just below the surface and it doesn’t take much to bring it out to the fore again. It may be buried but it isn’t dead.

 

[Martin Kernick]

Yes everyone is capable of rising above what was a genetic survival instinct, but it is only just below the surface and it doesn’t take much to bring it out to the fore again. It may be buried but it isn’t dead.

That seems true to me. This is what makes the politics of greed such a successful argument (in terms of selling it to the public). It's not a successful way to run society, it drives division and misery for the majority, but it's easy to appeal to the baser instincts of humankind. Politicians understand this very well. Make a human fearful and they will agree to all sorts of horrors inflicted on those they are told are their enemies. Tell a human that it's OK to be selfish, that their selfishness is, in fact, a virtue, and the lower minded part of humanity is often prepared to accept that lie, uncritcally, as truth.

Nelson Mandela came out with a statement which I think is true - but needs expanding in the light of our understanding of human instincts. He said:

"No one is born hating another person because of the color of his skin, or his background, or his religion. People must learn to hate, and if they can learn to hate, they can be taught to love, for love comes more naturally to the human heart than its opposite."

Though we have within us the capcity to hate, the capacity to blame 'the other', 'the stranger', 'the outsider' anyone labelled 'them', in an 'us' and 'them' situation, we also have the capacity to accept, to welcome, to love. We are born with both capacities, and which of these will prevail will depend on what we are influenced by. Although humans can derive a sort of shallow satisfaction from the products of hate and greed, almost all of us would, if we were asked to think about it, describe a deeper satisfaction, a feeling of fulfilment, completness, joy perhaps from the products of altruism. Society runs better, more healthily, more happily from the products of cooperation than it does from the products of competition.