Trump attacks Amazon, calling its shipping deal with Postal Service a 'scam' that must end

[metis]

I think this is the problem with the whole Biblical thinking, it takes emotions as arguments.

That's an unfortunate stereotype you're using. Yes, emotionalism and fanaticism can go with some religious, but this is also true of many non-religious.

The attempts of Dems and Reps to take the moral high ground by pushing moral stands are laughable.

I don't think disputes over morals are "laughable"-- quite the reverse, I think they're laudable if done properly. To put it another way, as Gandhi did, if anyone thinks that religion and politics can be separated, then they don't really understand religion; and then let me add that they also don't understand politics.

IMO, morals should be considered within the political sphere, otherwise anything goes regardless of whom may be hurt. The NAZI's, for example, felt that only sheer power counted, and it was the powerful who made the history books. Hitler pandered to the crowds, usually invoking "God" into his speeches, but he had no religious beliefs when becoming an adult.

It is not just religion that teaches morality, so I'm not pumping-up religion here. Over my 73 years, I've known a great many agnostics and atheists, many of whom seemed to be far more moral people than many of the "believers" I knew.

If we strip morals from how we may vote, and I think we've gone a long way in doing just that, then we might as well get used to having people like Trump in power-- or maybe even worse.

 

[Woberts]

Are you xenophobic?

I can confirm that I am not.

 

[Cassandra]

I can confirm that I am not.

You sound like one, otherwise you would not think along that lines.

In my experience people that try to box others do that according to their own thinking

 

[Cassandra]

That's an unfortunate stereotype you're using. Yes, emotionalism and fanaticism can go with some religious, but this is also true of many non-religious.

I don't think disputes over morals are "laughable"-- quite the reverse, I think they're laudable if done properly. To put it another way, as Gandhi did, if anyone thinks that religion and politics can be separated, then they don't really understand religion; and then let me add that they also don't understand politics.

IMO, morals should be considered within the political sphere, otherwise anything goes regardless of whom may be hurt. The NAZI's, for example, felt that only sheer power counted, and it was the powerful who made the history books. Hitler pandered to the crowds, usually invoking "God" into his speeches, but he had no religious beliefs when becoming an adult.

It is not just religion that teaches morality, so I'm not pumping-up religion here. Over my 73 years, I've known a great many agnostics and atheists, many of whom seemed to be far more moral people than many of the "believers" I knew.

If we strip morals from how we may vote, and I think we've gone a long way in doing just that, then we might as well get used to having people like Trump in power-- or maybe even worse.

Nice example of manipulation I was talking about , throwing Gandhi and Hitler in the mix to provoke the right response. That is the whole idea in the Bible too. Some people/acts/things are vilified others glorified to create labels one can stick on others to steer people towards or away from them. It does not allow for individual ethical assessment. You are with us or against us.

For moralists this kind of labeling has become such a normal behavior they are not even aware of it. You too believe your own words. Why? Because they make you feel good about yourself taking place in the ranks of angels and fighting the demons of you particular ideology.

What moralists are basically doing is dumnifying people with their moral indignations. It has little to do with how things really are, it just the projection of ones own moral bias on things. On a deeper level it tells common people not to go against it or become victim of virulent attacks of fanatics. It is basically done to take the voice of the masses away. and if they do choose a leader to voice them, he is called a populist and likened with Hitler.

You are right that this is or rather has become part of politics in the US. In Europe this thinking led to endless bloodshed and centuries of religious wars by self-convinced people like you. In the end this led to a new group of people emerging that called themselves the "Politikers". That is where your word "politicians" comes from. These people chose for a rational approach to state affairs in stead of moral ideological one. This ended the religious wars which was a huge relief as religious wars had killed something like half of the population in some countries.

Alas in the US after the Hippy age new brands of ideology/religion were created that are just as fanatical. On the one hand these evangelicals that base a fundamentalist Zionist Christiantiy on a kind of neo-Judaism and on the other hand the communist/neoliberal lot that fight wars over minority rights. Between them they destroy all rational thinking. Both sides present themselves as the reasonable ones and seek the moral highground.

Sorry metis, you are just part of the problem. This whole idea that a better society can only be reached by conflict over moral issues is a wrong one. In moral conflicts there never is a winner. And even if one side manages to silence the other with a lot of moral and legal repression, that only feeds the resentment and is temporarily.

If you want to become a better person, why not try to open your mind to the idea that your opponents are not total morons but have some arguments of their own that cut wood. And even if you can not accept that, accept the idea that people have right to create communities to their own ideas.

That people find this so hard is the heritage of the Bible with its claim of absolute truth, and condemnation of all others. It has split people in theists and atheists that use the same kind of thinking. The socialist church isn't any better than the Abrahamist church. They both turn people into moral soldiers for their belief system. In their fanatical pursuit they become each others justification.

How many messages did you post here in fighting wrong opinions? 23.000? And did you ever convince anyone? Or did you just lure them to dig in deeper shooting back at you? Good luck with your trench warfare.

 

[Woberts]

You sound like one, otherwise you would not think along that lines.

I really have no idea why you would think that. Can you give an example of my supposed xenophobia?

 

[Cassandra]

I really have no idea why you would think that. Can you give an example of my supposed xenophobia?

Oh, you want me to be your analist?

Hmmm. See what I can do. Why did Freud relate all behavior of his patients to sex? Well he lived in Victorian times, in which sex was severely repressed. A bit like discrimination is now repressed. People have deeper desires, but can not express those, so they start projecting them on others. You see that with homosexuals who become Evangelical pastors too, they start a crusade against homosexuality. Jews, the developers of the master race theory, on the other hand see Nazi's everywhere.

So there is my first take. A more profound analysis would require a far greater in-depth study. You could for instance be of mixed race and have ambivalent feelings about that. The human mind is a strange thing and does not follow the rules of logic.

I hope this helps you.

 

[Woberts]

Oh, you want me to be your analist?

No thanks. I would prefer for you to be my analyst. An analist would be doing something else entirely.
As for the rest, that's not really what I had in mind.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

Jews, the developers of the master race theory, on the other hand see Nazi's everywhere.

Wtf. Um, no. But you're usually incorrect and spewing hate all over the place so what else is new.

 

[Woberts]

Jews, the developers of the master race theory, on the other hand see Nazi's everywhere.

This is wikiedia, so take it with a grain of salt
Master race - Wikipedia

 

[metis]

Nice example of manipulation I was talking about , throwing Gandhi and Hitler in the mix to provoke the right response. That is the whole idea in the Bible too. Some people/acts/things are vilified others glorified to create labels one can stick on others to steer people towards or away from them. It does not allow for individual ethical assessment. You are with us or against us.

For moralists this kind of labeling has become such a normal behavior they are not even aware of it. You too believe your own words. Why? Because they make you feel good about yourself taking place in the ranks of angels and fighting the demons of you particular ideology.

What moralists are basically doing is dumnifying people with their moral indignations. It has little to do with how things really are, it just the projection of ones own moral bias on things. On a deeper level it tells common people not to go against it or become victim of virulent attacks of fanatics. It is basically done to take the voice of the masses away. and if they do choose a leader to voice them, he is called a populist and likened with Hitler.

You are right that this is or rather has become part of politics in the US. In Europe this thinking led to endless bloodshed and centuries of religious wars by self-convinced people like you. In the end this led to a new group of people emerging that called themselves the "Politikers". That is where your word "politicians" comes from. These people chose for a rational approach to state affairs in stead of moral ideological one. This ended the religious wars which was a huge relief as religious wars had killed something like half of the population in some countries.

Alas in the US after the Hippy age new brands of ideology/religion were created that are just as fanatical. On the one hand these evangelicals that base a fundamentalist Zionist Christiantiy on a kind of neo-Judaism and on the other hand the communist/neoliberal lot that fight wars over minority rights. Between them they destroy all rational thinking. Both sides present themselves as the reasonable ones and seek the moral highground.

Sorry metis, you are just part of the problem. This whole idea that a better society can only be reached by conflict over moral issues is a wrong one. In moral conflicts there never is a winner. And even if one side manages to silence the other with a lot of moral and legal repression, that only feeds the resentment and is temporarily.

If you want to become a better person, why not try to open your mind to the idea that your opponents are not total morons but have some arguments of their own that cut wood. And even if you can not accept that, accept the idea that people have right to create communities to their own ideas.

That people find this so hard is the heritage of the Bible with its claim of absolute truth, and condemnation of all others. It has split people in theists and atheists that use the same kind of thinking. The socialist church isn't any better than the Abrahamist church. They both turn people into moral soldiers for their belief system. In their fanatical pursuit they become each others justification.

How many messages did you post here in fighting wrong opinions? 23.000? And did you ever convince anyone? Or did you just lure them to dig in deeper shooting back at you? Good luck with your trench warfare.

I think it's entirely hypocritical for you to have posted the above as you actually violate what you're accusing me and others of doing. On top of that, you have stereotyped me, thus missing the mark by quite a wide margin at times, so all I see with the above is the same kind of judgmental and "emotional" rant that you accused me and some others of. That's called "hypocrisy", Cassandra, and maybe you should work on that before accusing others.

 

[james dixon]

You're missing the point. You have paid the UPS rate when you order Amazon (in most cases). Amazon is profiting the difference between the UPS rate and what the PO is allowing them to pay for their service.

so what

 

[james dixon]

& So It Was Said----------------

(Ezek 36:17 KJV) Son of man, when the house of Israel dwelt in their own land, they defiled it by their ..own way and by their doings: their way was before me as the uncleanness of a removed woman.

(Ezek 36:18 KJV) Wherefore I poured my fury upon them for the blood that they had shed upon the land, and for their idols wherewith they had polluted it.

(Ezek 36:22 KJV) Therefore say unto the house of Israel, Thus saith the Lord GOD; I do not this for your sakes, O house of Israel, but for mine holy name's sake, which ye have profaned among the heathen, whither ye went.

(Ezek 36:24 KJV) For I will take you from among the heathen, and gather you out of all countries, and will bring you into your own land.

(Ezek 36:31 KJV) Then shall ye remember your own evil ways, and your doings that were not good, and shall loathe yourselves in your own sight for your iniquities and for your abominations.

(Ezek 36:32 KJV) Not for your sakes do I this, saith the Lord GOD, be it known unto you: be ashamed and confounded for your own ways, O house of Israel.

(Jer 24:9 KJV) And I will deliver them to be removed into all the kingdoms of the earth for their hurt, to be a reproach and a proverb, a taunt and a curse, in all places whither I shall drive them.

(Ezek 21:32 KJV)Thou shalt be for fuel to the fire; thy blood shall be in the midst of the land;thou shalt be no more remembered: for I the LORD have spoken it.

..According to a 2002 study by the Jewish Agency, "the number of Jews in the world is declining at an average of 50,000 per year."

Jewish population by country - Wikipedia

 

[Woberts]

& So It Was Said----------------

(Ezek 36:17 KJV) Son of man, when the house of Israel dwelt in their own land, they defiled it by their ..own way and by their doings: their way was before me as the uncleanness of a removed woman.

(Ezek 36:18 KJV) Wherefore I poured my fury upon them for the blood that they had shed upon the land, and for their idols wherewith they had polluted it.

(Ezek 36:22 KJV) Therefore say unto the house of Israel, Thus saith the Lord GOD; I do not this for your sakes, O house of Israel, but for mine holy name's sake, which ye have profaned among the heathen, whither ye went.

(Ezek 36:24 KJV) For I will take you from among the heathen, and gather you out of all countries, and will bring you into your own land.

(Ezek 36:31 KJV) Then shall ye remember your own evil ways, and your doings that were not good, and shall loathe yourselves in your own sight for your iniquities and for your abominations.

(Ezek 36:32 KJV) Not for your sakes do I this, saith the Lord GOD, be it known unto you: be ashamed and confounded for your own ways, O house of Israel.

(Jer 24:9 KJV) And I will deliver them to be removed into all the kingdoms of the earth for their hurt, to be a reproach and a proverb, a taunt and a curse, in all places whither I shall drive them.

(Ezek 21:32 KJV)Thou shalt be for fuel to the fire; thy blood shall be in the midst of the land;thou shalt be no more remembered: for I the LORD have spoken it.

..According to a 2002 study by the Jewish Agency, "the number of Jews in the world is declining at an average of 50,000 per year."

Jewish population by country - Wikipedia

I really hope this isn't what I think it is........

 

[BSM1]

so what

Everybody knows I'm a screamin' capitalist but I don't like being hoo-doo'd...

 

[tytlyf]

Everybody knows I'm a screamin' capitalist but I don't like being hoo-doo'd...

Everyone is capitalist. It just depends if you're the type of capitalist that supports crushing the middle class for profit. I'm not one of those.

 

[BSM1]

Everyone is capitalist. It just depends if you're the type of capitalist that supports crushing the middle class for profit. I'm not one of those.

That's not a Capitalist, that's a Democrat.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

Everyone is capitalist.

Not everyone.

 

[tytlyf]

That's not a Capitalist, that's a Democrat.

Actually, that's a republican. See latest tax law. There are no middle class policies in the republican party. Feel free to name one.

Not everyone.

Not everyone is a capitalist? Give me an example of a person who isn't.

cap·i·tal·ism
noun

1. an economic and political system in which a country's trade and industry are controlled by private owners for profit, rather than by the state.
   synonyms: free enterprise, private enterprise, the free market;
   enterprise culture

 

[Shadow Wolf]

Not everyone is a capitalist? Give me an example of a person who isn't.

Me. And if you notice, your definition is that of Capitalism, not a Capitalist.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

Dr. King was also not a Capitalist.