If you live in a large enough city, you eventually will run into this sort of placard (unfortunately attached to a loony person). Right there, between “DRUNKARD’S” and “CATHOLIC’S”… I think the misspelled word is meant to be Baha’i. Misspelling is of course, the least of this person’s problems.
I had no idea I ♥ the devil. Including Baha’i, little ol’ me fits into six of the categories. Can you beat that? Do you ♥ the devil more?
Boy, that's a lot of hate. About the only thing this person seems to love is Jesus... and' apostrophes'.
Bonus points if you can tell us what P.K. stands for in Jeebus-speak.
Oh and before I forget… McCain ‘08!!
Im leaning towards PORN KING’S, but the urban dictionary offer’s me a wide choice. Maybe its outsider art. Thank’s, Steve
I, Eve, in Jesus.
The loony person must be a Collyridian heretic.
What’s the meaning of: “Oh and before I forget… McCain ‘08!!” I’m a Baha’i out here in Maryland and feel like I’m at a DNC convention sometimes at Holy Day celebrations. How any Baha’i can justify voting for any liberal candidate is lost on me.
Hi Ryuan,
Thank you for your military service in Iraq or Afghanistan.
P.K. = Promise Keepers?
The Keepers were an American Christian movement about a decade ago. I don’t understand how there would be a connection here, but it might fit.
@Ryan, did you follow the link to the video? first time being accused of light-handed sarcasm
@Adam, thanks, that makes sense. here’s the wikipedia article on the promise keepers
Sports nuts: that ’s the first I’ve seen that one on such a list.
I’m sure if pressed the hate would equally extend to macadamia, hazel and brazil nuts. But notice there is no mention of Jews. There are some lines, even whack-jobs don’t cross
Ryan,
I’m always truly interested to know more about Bahais who do not support American liberalism. Do you consider yourself a conservative? Why did you become a Bahai, or were you born into a Bahai family?
oops! my bad, I missed that Ryan didn’t like democrats. As a Baha’i and just as a human being, I don’t think about it as you do Ryan. That is, I don’t consider myself this or that but at every election I look at the candidates, what they stand for and who they are. Then I make a choice. In this election the choice is extremely clear, as any poll can tell you.
Satanists are excused, I suppose.
No space for Communist’s and Terrorist’s?
Other runners up:
Evolutionist’s
Journalist’s
Grammarist’s
Flatulator’s
And Priscilla, that’s “sport’s nut’s”. Every apostrophe has a thousand meanings.
Hummm. “Government Recipients”. Doesn’t that include everyone in Alaska then, even at the Wasilla Bible Church, because everyone in Alaska gets the oil fund check every year? Doesn’t that also include everyone in the People’s Republic of Wall Street in the Nine Core Banks? Looks like everyone is going to hell. But I think we already are in hell with the mentality of so called “religious” people walking around on this planet. I’ll try to find that spot on quote by Abdu’l-Baha where he basically says religious people are completely incompetent and should never be put in charge of running anything involving the public good. I think he is right. I think it is all a matter of brain chemistry. People who are delusional and insane and who never never been held accountable for anything in their lives should never be put in charge of anything. The rise of the technology of the Internet will now bring accountability to every person and every organization on Earth. It is an incredible thing to watch develop. It is fierce and it is here to stay. The politics of the judgment of accountability IS the new politics of the World Age. It is upon everyone on Earth. It is a game changer. There is no place to run and no place to hide. If you are an incompetent idiot in your responsibilities and duties to the public good, you are going to be exposed.
You have to get with the power of the New World Age and the New World Pole orientation when the new Divine song gets on the radio and into the affairs of men as so beautifully expressed in “O Brother, Where Art Thou” when Pappy O’Daniel decides to 100% support the Soggy Bottom Boys as a hit act on the Pappy O’Daniel Flour Hour.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TIKz1phnuCc
Everyone get more and more “Old-Timey”!
Everyone keep posting!
Oh, and here’s something for Baha’is, online. As in Baha’is, online.
Here it is:
http://www.episcopalcafe.com/daily/interfaith/lessons_for_christians_in_the.php#more
Bonzo agrees! If we can’t support individual liberty rather than submission to the Administrative Order then we’re useless! We’re useless! Useless!
I think if McCain wins Mrs. Palin will make sure that there are more of these nut jobs on each campus and that the sign will be spelled correctly… VIVA Obama!
Interesting that “murderers’” is not on there. And that comes direct from teh bible “Thou Shalt Not Kill”
Thanks for replying, Ryan. I, too, am more interested in ideologies and philosophies rather than party politics. That’s why I was interested to know your views on things, since you don’t support liberal candidates. I’m also a firm believer in individual liberty but don’t see that idea supported much in the two major American political parties. Out of all the Bahai friends and family I’ve talked about politics with over the years, I think three or four said they’ve voted for Republicans and only a couple of those seemed genuinely supportive or even aware of traditional conservatism espoused by Edmund Burke and Russell Kirk.
Ryan and David,
If you are both Americans, why aren’t you both in Iraq or Afghanistan RIGHT NOW defending your country as TRUE CONSERVATIVE PATRIOTS for our sacred freedoms as well as “doing God’s work” as an extra bonus as former UHJ member Glenford Mitchell says?
Let’s hear why you choose not to be there as true, dedicated, patriots interested in defending “individual liberty”?
This is your job as patriots:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EI4UNem_Eik
Your job is to put it on the line for “individual liberty” if that is what you believe in. Otherwise you are living on the blood and sacrifice of others. And people who live on the blood and sacrifice of others are spiritual vampires.
Why aren’t you both carrying a rifle RIGHT NOW?
Craig Parke
1st Lieutenant
U.S. Army
1969-1971
Ryan, what about Abdu’l-Bahas model of a community “store-house”? are you familiar with it? or about this on profit sharing:
and even more plainly (my own emphasis):
and Shoghi Effendi:
Wow, Craig! All I said was that I believe in individual liberty, and you automatically assume I’m a chickenhawk, warmonger. That’s a mighty big leap to make. Your assumptions about me are wrong, by the way.
Hi Ryan,
Welcome to the discussion. At first I thought you might be the guy behind The Baha’i Liberty Blog, but that’s Todd Steinberg. I think Todd makes a very good argument for libertarian views.
I’m a self-employed computer technician and do quite a bit of work for small businesses. I lean well to the left, even by NZ standards, and I’ve found that many business people tend towards the right –which, in NZ, is about as far right as the US Democratic Party, I suspect.
But those Left/Right categories do seem to be blurring. I find that business people are often very generous about offering direct aid to others and about offering a fair reward for work done. And they frequently have a strong social conscience. I think it’s important to get beyond the labels and the fixed positions. All people are capable of virtues, and those virtues can be expressed in many different ways.
ka kite
Steve
Baquia: There are contradictions in the quotes provided (no big surprise there). Here is the most telling phrase IMO:
“The rich too must be merciful to the poor, contributing from willing hearts to their needs without being forced or compelled to do so.”
It all comes down to force, limiting it or allowing it. If the individual cannot have the freedom to make correct decisions how will it ever be known if he/she is following God’s message?
As far as the Effendi quote I’m wondering what the content is of the surrounding text from that quote. If it stands alone then quite simply, he’s wrong. A progressive income tax is nothing more than legalized theft, therefore, immoral.
Steve: Thank you for the welcome.
For me the underlying premise of modern day liberalism is flawed. Liberalism must function on the notion that human nature is flawed and humans will not make correct decisions if left alone, therefore, gov’t needs to exist to force the individual to do the right thing.
Let me know your thoughts.
Ryan,
your comments were almost lost due to an overzealous anti-spam measure. I’ve rescued everything I could but if there is one missing let me know.
Thanks for the reply. Did you catch this from Abdu’l-Baha in the above quote?:
“The remedy must be legislative readjustment of conditions.”
What do you think that means?
We know from the science of psychology that human nature is in fact “flawed” in that we do not always make the best decisions. Almost always our “lizard brain” wins out and then our frontal lobe hurriedly comes up with a pseudo-rational explanation of our choices.
It isn’t a matter of government forcing anyone what to do but understanding that living in a society means that we are more than just a grouping of single persons. We are a community. Interconnected. This is what the Baha’i Faith teaches. That we are leaves of one tree. How can one branch be strong when the others are withering and dying? This is the new paradigm that humanity is awakening to more and more every day.
Hi Ryan,
You wrote:
I don’t get that notion from Wiki and, as I’ve said, I tend to reject political labels in favour of looking at the virtues people demonstrate.
I also think that there are other big processes going on, such as globalisation and greater individuation, that don’t fit neatly into the existing political landscape and challenge our old notions of what does and doesn’t work. For example, there are nationalists and protectionists of all stripes, and I think none of them are responsing adequately to globalisation.
Your understanding of “the underlying premise of modern day liberalism” seems to be what is called, perjoratively, “the nanny state” in New Zealand. I’m ambivalent. I think it’s clear that the market should be regulated, and I favour a mixed economy along the lines of Scandinavian or Australasian countries. But businesses and individuals can face huge and un-necessary compliance costs from a we-know-what’s best-for-you government bureaucracy, to an extent that the only business that’s growing is government, and government makes itself immune from its own restrictions. On the other hand, countries with weak controls face all kinds of environmental and social injustices, because individuals are not necessarily any better than collectives about doing the right thing. It’s about finding the right checks and balances.
Tell us if we’re going off-topic, Baquia.
I think you missed the left turn at Albuquerque
I am glad to know you are not a chickenhawk warmonger then! The world of the last eight years and the current very sheltered insufferable version of the blind and rote imitation Baha’i Faith is now an ocean of chickenhawk warmongers it seems. Maybe that should be a a new Ruhi Course: “How to be a Chickenhawk Warmonger in the New Talking Head Theorist Class Baha’i Faith”. It has gotten on my nerves. Sorry. I apologize. But I have completely had it with these people. Especially in the now completely top down incredibly distant and effete theorist class Baha’i Faith. Glenford Mitchell’s incredibly thoughtless a**hole statement is why I left the Faith after 32 years. In my view there are just one too many Neocon chickenhawk warmonger theorist punks in the Baha’i Faith these days. Sorry if I took you and Ryan for being Baha’i William Kristols. Please accept my sincere apology then since you say you are not a chickenhawk warmonger. My bad.
Ryan,
With your top down uniform ideological viewpoint what is your position on the repealing of the Glass-Stiegel Act of 1933 ten years ago in 1998 that has led to the current world financial crisis due to the removal of the social engineering firewall between commercial banks, investment banks, securities dealers, and insurance companies? Let’s hear it.
Hi Craig,
The repeal of the Glass Steagall Act in 1999 may well have helped lead to the world financial crisis, but it only applies to the US. New Zealand’s relatively tight banking regulations, as applied through the Reserve Bank, have kept our banks relatively unscathed. The relatively unregulated finance companies have seen a string of collapses.
My point is that we’ve seen collapsing housing investment bubbles in, not only in the US, but in New Zealand, Ireland, England and Spain, and we’ve seen bank bail-outs in Europe. As an example of the extent of the financial transactions, the failed Halifax Bank of Scotland had investments in a NZ land development at Ngunguru, New Zealand that I’ve been fighting against.
Financial systems and transactions are global, but the regulation is mainly national. That’s where a lot of the difficulties lie, I suspect.
An instructive small-country perspective on the world financial crisis:
Brian Easton
Gareth Morgan (Best after 8 November)
ka kite
Steve
Steve,
Thank you for these two links. I find Easton’s viewpoint most interesting. I am going to see what anyone here has to say from the smaller country viewpoint.
My understanding from my research is that the real atomic chain reaction fear that has spread the crisis into the global financial system for BOTH large and small country alike is the terrifying fear of financial AIDS over the Credit Default Swaps (CDS’s) out there as potentially ticking atomic car bombs. No one is sure who holds these things and is exposed to a far greater danger than ANYONE KNOWS. What would be most effective in this situation: actual liquidity or the guarantee of liquidity? If push comes to shove and actual liquidity becomes necessary to make it through another 24 hour interval, then this guy Easton is right. Inflation and/or worst case stagflation will result leading, in my mind, to an equally as dangerous economic catastrophe.
What I am trying to research, therefore, is how the Lehman Brothers settlement (on Thursday, October 20th I believe it was) on the CDS exposure was resolved. They settled a potentially devastating Lehman exposure of $455 Billion in Credit Default Swaps (CDS’s) losses for a manageable $6 Billion.
How?
The MSM (Main Stream Media) cover story here is the hedging positions of all of the various counter parties all cancelled out much of the incredible toxic exposure. Now it’s all “Nothing to see here, so just run along.”
If this was all so simple the mechanism, then WHY did die hard “Chicago School” economic fundamentalists in the current totally ideologically obsessed Bush Administration start partially NATIONALIZING BANKS in the new “People’s Republic of Wall Street” where stock brokers now wear little Chairman Mao hats with red stars or dress like Che Guevara! Something smells fishy and a lot of both professional and citizen economists are out there doing detective work. But, it appears, nobody is talking! There is even LESS transparency in how this was done than in how the Baha’i Administrative Order actually works which no one has ever been able to figure out in my entire lifetime to date. What are the rules on how you settle Credit Default Swaps? Does every such case have a similar or potentially very different settlement profile? Some reports out there say there are going to be years of litigation on the Lehman bankruptcy for the unsecured creditors. What are the real facts? Someone should give an open account of how $455 Billion of catastrophic exposure was settled for $6 Billion because this mechanism may become very important very soon on a daily basis if dominoes start falling into each other. If this was so easy, why the September liquidity terror that the CDS’s would topple the entire world financial system?
I say people are lying and there is, by some accounts, $255 Billion of toxic exposure in the Lehman bankruptcy still on the table that has been hushed up. Some feel there is some other factor in play that is being kept from the public.
I am thinking that the real solution is to by International agreement declare ALL CDS contracts worldwide completely null and void. That is the real October 1917 solution and the bankers can all then start dressing like Karl Marx in his later days hanging out at the British Museum too as a nice policy arc. It will all be the new “in-thing” look on Wall Street. This move would take capital injection inflation fears out of the equation. So why not take a look at this remedy? Just outlaw these financial instruments and let everyone take them off their books. Corporate bonds insured by them that default will just have to be settled without them the old fashioned way. There is a precedent for outlaying some types of derivatives at least in British law since 1992.
We are living in very, very strange times. To me this was all wrought by the deranged brain chemistry of brain dead completely thoughtless automaton ideologues who should never have been put in charge of ANYTHING, ANYWHERE on Earth. The potential catastrophic collapse of the lock step World Financial System, the Republican Party in the U.S., and the current version of the top down Orwellian NEW THINK Ruhiized Baha’i Faith worldwide are ALL examples of this amazing dysfunctional and completely mathematically self-defeating brain chemistry. I do feel that the ability to do rational critical thinking on a daily basis is now going to come back in favor very, very soon. Maybe as soon as NEXT WEDNESDAY MORNING here in the U.S.(!) Maybe Eric Hoffer will even become a popular read again even in remote villages across the planet.
And, remember, the goal of “RUHI BOOK 1929″ which I will continue with AFTER the U.S. election, is for everyone here who finishes the class to LEND ME MONEY as part of the “practical exercise skill building workbook project”. All national currencies will be accepted.
Brian Easton picked me up hitch-hiking in the mid-80’s and he was such a good guy
that had me over for dinner sometime later and even bought one of my prints.
Being the illiterate bum i was in those days, i’d never heard of him before.
response to Ryan’s comments:
hi Ryan, this sounds like something straight from Nozick who or perhaps it was some other libertarian said that “tax was theft”.
Another approach to this argument is to think, it is really fair that someone with a diploma gets more pay than someone who works out all day in all weather? Is ‘brain-skill’ really more valuable than ‘physical skill’?
Is if fair that someone gets to go to university for that diploma because their parents either can afford it, or because that person went to the ‘right’ primary or secondary school, or was born in the ‘right’ country?
Is it fair that I was not born in the U.S, but in a country where as the eldest of a working-class family of nine children, even though I couldn’t go to university immediately, after 2 years of work, I could?
I know that if I had have been born in the U.S. there is no way I could have gone to university, yet a libertarian view of this would be, that, providing opportunity via a system of tax, so that the state paid for providing the educational opportunities, is unfair. Unfair to whom?
To those who would have had the opportunity to go to university anyway?
To those who have more money, for whom the higher tax rate might mean economizing on that second home or second car, whereas for the one on the lower income it might mean being able to pay the rent and have money left over for the kids?
Would this more or less fair?
Of course, life is never fair, it is not fair that I was born in Aotearoa (new zealand), not fair that I was not born handicapped (well, some might debate that :), and so, but as Bahais I do think that we should aim towards a developing a society aimed for greater potential for opportunity and not leave it up to inherited inequalities to determine the opportunities any individual may have.
Abdu’l-Baha certainly doesn’t think that tax is a theft:
Abdu’l-Baha, “Sermon on the Art of Governance”
http://www.h-net.org/~bahai/trans/vol7/govern.htm
Taxes are in the end a form of solidarity. We all pay and contribute towards the society we part take in.
If you look at this in material terms, which is the libertarian approach, then, the police would be protecting the wealthier more than the poorer, because it would the two or more cars and the mansion that would be protected, while all the poorer person has to benefit is having his or her rented appartment and collection of second-hand bicycles. I would say that a progressive tax system still benefits the wealthier more, so they should pay more, leaving aside the argument that in order to earn more, they have already had a greater benefit from their society to start with.
Ryan, this article from Shiller mentions something interesting:
A progressive income tax is nothing more than legalized theft, therefore, immoral.
———————-
How so? If you are a worker making minimum wage your rely on the roads provided by the government (through taxes) to get to your job and back home. And you may use those roads on occasion to see family/friends, etc. If you own a business, you rely on those roads to bring workers to you, goods to you, sell your goods, etc. I think those who make more money are also using the governments services more. Just my opinion. A graduated income tax is justice and fair, so I take offence at your “immoral” remark.
This appears to assert that taxation itself is theft. Why bring the words “progressive” and “income” into it? While we’re at it, we might just as easily assert that all law undermines (or thieves) human freedom. What moral authority does the majority hold above the individual, if the majority is merely an accumulation of individuals? There you have it: anarchy. Have the courage to embrace it?
Hello, nice to meet you strawman.
I don’t recall advocating anarchy, however, I think it’s interesting that the easiest road to anarchy is when a society has so many laws that at any one time each citizen is breaking one of them…Do you have the courage to embrace it?
Craig Parke
Re: Housing/Banking Crisis
I always look at the root of these types of problems and it all stems from the Community Re-investment Act of 1977. Relining wasn’t used by banks to discriminate, it was used to limit risk. The gov’t should have never bullied them into doing away with the practice. The addition of the sub-prime aspect of it in 1995 opened the flood-gates then it was just a matter of some greedy bankers AND individual home owners to get us where we are today.
sonja: As Bahai’s we know that we are “our brother’s keeper”, do we need gov’t to FORCE us to be?
Hi Ryan,
Perhaps I did construct a straw man. What do you think of him? Is he offensive? I think he’s rather attractive. Shall we emulate him? immolate him? I confess that I am a bit of an anarchist myself, being a supporter of Thoreauvian civil disobedience. I simply wanted to know whether you consider yourself such a dangerous radical. Do you forfeit all of your moral authority to the majority, or do you reserve the moral authority to break any law?
Your friend the anarchist,
Dan
Hi Ryan,
You have a point, in that both extremes - no government and big government - can lead to anarchy. However, what you need to face is that progressive taxation is mainstream policy:
“Most tax systems around the world contain progressive aspects.”
Progressive tax examples
So, in arguing that progressive income tax is nothing more than legalized theft, you are setting yourself well toward the “no government” end of the scale, whereas those who argue against your view are taking a middle course.
ka kite
Steve
…so “mainstream” = correct? Face it, people like seeing the so called “rich” taxed more because they harbor a dislike for them.
I think what we are talking about without realizing it is the Laffer Curve. Great video (if you have insomnia):
I assume you mean “redlining”.
I have studied the facts and what you say is just not true. Nice try but it is just another garbled half truth right wing talking point. The banks that worked the CRA loans were REAL community banks that were much more conservative. The record shows that THEY were conservative lenders and actually turned down people for loans!
The 1995 sub-prime component only went viral after the Wall Street lobbyists got what they wanted in the 1998 change of the Glass-Stiegel Act that caused the whole system to go into air guitar mode. The firewall between commercial banks, investments banks, securities dealers/market makers, and insurance companies. And, yes, BOTH Republicans are Democrats are responsible and many on BOTH sides should go to the guillotine too. As a good Baha’i I was always registered Independent. But as it all turned out after 37 years of membership the most incompetent and corrupt Republican or Democrat were hands down more effective in doing anything in the real world than anyone in the Baha’i Faith Administrative Order at trying to solve desperate problems.
But if you study future chapters of Ruhi Book 1929 which I will start posting after I recover from the stress of this Election, I will show you that the “securities” mortgage component of the CDO’s are dangerous but they are not catastrophic. It is the “insurance” CDS’s component that is the nuclear weapon that can detonate and take down the financial system of the entire world at any time until they can be defused. It will take leadership and world cooperation between the banking system of all nations to do this. It must be done with great care. If it isn’t we are truly facing a second Great Depression or even worse. Once again, it is all completely over the heads of the BAO just like every other event of the 20th Century where the Faith completely missed the boat by not having any strength or chops on any level whatsoever.
But hopefully everyone here can get up to speed by taking Ruhi Book 1929 and perhaps be able to follow the course of action that the world must take to try to help as best you can.
And, again, at the end of the course everyone will be asked to lend me money as the “practical workbook exercise”.
But nice try on the CRA argument! Oh, BTW, I bought my house in 1975 on one of the State/Federal combination mortgage programs that preceded the CRA Act of 1977. And I paid it off over the next 25 years!
Craig Parke:
I don’t have the time deconstruct all that wind but here’s the bottom line - As usual, inept GOVERNMENT intervention is what CAUSED that whole problem, this is unassailable. You can’t make up your own facts.
How much more “progressive” does the U.S. need to get?
http://www.taxfoundation.org/blog/show/23856.html
http://www.ntu.org/main/page.php?PageID=6
Ryan,
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/john-cusack/no-currency-left-to-buy-t_b_140250.html
What say you?
I also say R.I.P Studs Terkel.
I once got a nice note from him.
A fine, fine man.
The power of the New World Age is now moving on to other peoples, other nations, and other spiritual movements because the Baha’is in their top down straight jacketed Borg ineptitude have run the Divine Power of the Cosmos once given to them right into the ground. So it is all now going to go to other souls.
The Baha’is have maybe 15 people total knocking on doors at any given time in my state of PA after 87 years of the BAO while Great Depressions and Total World Wars come and go. The Obama Campaign had 300,000 volunteers knocking on a million doors here just last week alone because this was a critical battle ground state.
The result as of 23:00 HOURS EST November 4th, 2008 while Glenford Mitchell travels around another day on Earth giving his Power Point Presentation on Shoghi Effendi to tiny captive audiences:
Reactions Around The World (PHOTOS)
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/11/04/reactions-around-the-worl_n_141187.html
The irony is incredible.
The U.S. invades Iraq and topples its former ally Saddam Hussein Abd al-Majid al-Tikriti.
Now it has an African-American president-elect whose middle name is Hussein.
Would you like some karma with your fries?