@ bob:
Theories of world history are big fun for me, but "to each a zone," is what I like to say. As for the defense comment, I guess it would come down to how one actually chose to define "like us." I agree with you, however, that Mr. CoCs appears to have a more global or one might say progressive or advanced view of the CoCs than many of the front-line, or imaginary front-line, C'ers. I have little doubt that if you produced some version of Huntington's statements on a discussion thread at HotAir, you would be denounced as a useful idiot, leftwing traitor, and facilitator of the totalitarian Shariah takeover.
@ miguel cervantes:
And that has very little to do with the subject as far as I can tell, unless you're trying to provide evidence of the convergence of civilizations marked by unstable identities - like accelerated particles fusing in collision - at the extremes.
@ miguel cervantes:
The "line" is one likely drawn more often in the imagination than in the external world. The existence of no-go zones, sacrifice zones, zones of backwardness, embattled or disputed zones, imaginary zones, etc., would not contradict the major point. For a number of reasons the universal civilization would very likely be marked by an even higher degree of outward non-uniformity and decentralization than previous civilizations or world-historical phases. If we think of "the West" as a civilization, that would be despite the presence within its presumable territory of very widely divergent social organizations, cultural terrains, and conditions of life.
@ bob:
A progressive-seeming position, but I disagree with him: There is a universal civilization busy being born amidst the parallel internal crises of (theoretically, decreasingly) separate civilizations. "The outlines of the next civilization are everywhere visible in the ruins of the old" - as some New Agey guy I read a long time ago liked to say, channeling Hegel. To the extent there are "elements of commonality" to be identified and a path of coexistence, that is the universal civilization already on the rise.
Interesting how when Rauf says it, it's "insensitive" and "out of the mainstream," but when Kristol says it, it's neoconservatism; and when Beck says it, it's Tea Party patriotism questioning with boldness; and when Rumsfeld's DOD says it, it's the War on Terror...
Don't think he did actually have any power. But he had a position of potential influence potentially advising the White House on the potential implementation of potential communist green jobbing, all cooked up at the Apollo Theater, apparently a communist front all along.
@ miguel cervantes:
Or anyway that's one completely objective way to discuss the idea as well as what Spain has attempted and why Spain is facing economic/fiscal problems.
@ fuster:
Are you really in the dark about "green collar" proposals, why the far left got into them, and why they're hard to justify economically?
any evidence of at best, Imam Rauf’s insensitivity,
I've considered, and considered, and considered it. I've also considered the evidence of, at best, mistaken attacks on Rauf. I've yet to see a single apology from his character assassins - including you - for false and misleading statements. I've yet to see one of them offer an appreciation for his numerous positive, Islam-reforming or terrorist-denying statements and gestures.
I don't care if he's flirted with Wahhabis and the others on your enemies list. I think it would be great to have someone who has done so and emerged better-informed and unshaken in the (trans-)national dialogue, and capable of transmitting messages and influence back the other way, too. Too bad if we're not ready for it. Frightening to think we might not ever be. I approve of his statement about 9/11, and have explained why at length. I approve of his refusal to say the words you want him to say about Hamas. I think it's terrific that people have been exposed to both of those statements over and over again. By next year at this time, it may even be possible to have an adult discussion about them, about Sharia, about Sufism, about a lot of other things. I'm not counting on it, but apparently this all had to be gone through sooner or later.
@ Rex Caruthers:
Not a conservative. The closest we've seen, that I'm aware of, to any major conservatives disavowing the anti-mosquers has been Chris Christie playing "the middle against both sides," Michael Gerson (moving into the lower tiers) validating Obama's statement, and a handful of more minor figures, mainly ones already mistrusted in TrueConservative-land.
I haven't been following Glenn Beck - and I'm assuming that if he'd made a pro-Rauf statement I'd have heard and heard and heard about it - but I think it might be a brilliant move for him to come out in favor. I'm not expecting it in the least, but most of his audience would stay with him and even thank him, and it would poleaxe and cross-eye his usual attackers. Ditto for Dick Cheney. A lot of people have been musing about W making a statement similar to the ones he used to deliver regularly when Prez.
@ bob:
Uh-oh... I sense another very involved dialogue coming on... might be a good thing that I've got some business to attend to... ;)
@ miguel cervantes:
Can you name a civilization that had borders that weren't "bloody"?
@ bob:
Theories of world history are big fun for me, but "to each a zone," is what I like to say. As for the defense comment, I guess it would come down to how one actually chose to define "like us." I agree with you, however, that Mr. CoCs appears to have a more global or one might say progressive or advanced view of the CoCs than many of the front-line, or imaginary front-line, C'ers. I have little doubt that if you produced some version of Huntington's statements on a discussion thread at HotAir, you would be denounced as a useful idiot, leftwing traitor, and facilitator of the totalitarian Shariah takeover.
@ miguel cervantes:
And that has very little to do with the subject as far as I can tell, unless you're trying to provide evidence of the convergence of civilizations marked by unstable identities - like accelerated particles fusing in collision - at the extremes.
@ miguel cervantes:
The "line" is one likely drawn more often in the imagination than in the external world. The existence of no-go zones, sacrifice zones, zones of backwardness, embattled or disputed zones, imaginary zones, etc., would not contradict the major point. For a number of reasons the universal civilization would very likely be marked by an even higher degree of outward non-uniformity and decentralization than previous civilizations or world-historical phases. If we think of "the West" as a civilization, that would be despite the presence within its presumable territory of very widely divergent social organizations, cultural terrains, and conditions of life.
@ bob:
A progressive-seeming position, but I disagree with him: There is a universal civilization busy being born amidst the parallel internal crises of (theoretically, decreasingly) separate civilizations. "The outlines of the next civilization are everywhere visible in the ruins of the old" - as some New Agey guy I read a long time ago liked to say, channeling Hegel. To the extent there are "elements of commonality" to be identified and a path of coexistence, that is the universal civilization already on the rise.
Speaking of Beck:
http://thinkprogress.org/2010/08/17/beck-rauf-radicalized/
Interesting how when Rauf says it, it's "insensitive" and "out of the mainstream," but when Kristol says it, it's neoconservatism; and when Beck says it, it's Tea Party patriotism questioning with boldness; and when Rumsfeld's DOD says it, it's the War on Terror...
Don't think he did actually have any power. But he had a position of potential influence potentially advising the White House on the potential implementation of potential communist green jobbing, all cooked up at the Apollo Theater, apparently a communist front all along.
@ miguel cervantes:
Or anyway that's one completely objective way to discuss the idea as well as what Spain has attempted and why Spain is facing economic/fiscal problems.
@ fuster:
Are you really in the dark about "green collar" proposals, why the far left got into them, and why they're hard to justify economically?
miguel cervantes wrote:
I've considered, and considered, and considered it. I've also considered the evidence of, at best, mistaken attacks on Rauf. I've yet to see a single apology from his character assassins - including you - for false and misleading statements. I've yet to see one of them offer an appreciation for his numerous positive, Islam-reforming or terrorist-denying statements and gestures.
I don't care if he's flirted with Wahhabis and the others on your enemies list. I think it would be great to have someone who has done so and emerged better-informed and unshaken in the (trans-)national dialogue, and capable of transmitting messages and influence back the other way, too. Too bad if we're not ready for it. Frightening to think we might not ever be. I approve of his statement about 9/11, and have explained why at length. I approve of his refusal to say the words you want him to say about Hamas. I think it's terrific that people have been exposed to both of those statements over and over again. By next year at this time, it may even be possible to have an adult discussion about them, about Sharia, about Sufism, about a lot of other things. I'm not counting on it, but apparently this all had to be gone through sooner or later.
@ Rex Caruthers:
Not a conservative. The closest we've seen, that I'm aware of, to any major conservatives disavowing the anti-mosquers has been Chris Christie playing "the middle against both sides," Michael Gerson (moving into the lower tiers) validating Obama's statement, and a handful of more minor figures, mainly ones already mistrusted in TrueConservative-land.
I haven't been following Glenn Beck - and I'm assuming that if he'd made a pro-Rauf statement I'd have heard and heard and heard about it - but I think it might be a brilliant move for him to come out in favor. I'm not expecting it in the least, but most of his audience would stay with him and even thank him, and it would poleaxe and cross-eye his usual attackers. Ditto for Dick Cheney. A lot of people have been musing about W making a statement similar to the ones he used to deliver regularly when Prez.