Cut and Run

These few paragraphs are from an interesting commentary by Spengler. Read the entire provocative article at: http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Front_Page/GK01Aa01.html

``A wide range of fertility rates characterizes the Islamic world. Most of the variation in fertility can be explained by a single factor, namely, literacy: as Muslims (and especially Muslim women) learn to read, they drift away from traditional faith. The birthrate drops in consequence.``

``There really is no such thing as a ``Muslim`` fertility rate, but rather a wide spectrum of fertility rates that express different degrees of modernization. Where traditional conditions prevail, characterized by high rates of illiteracy (and especially female illiteracy) the fertility rate remains at the top of the world`s rankings.``

``But where the modern world encroaches, fertility rates are plummeting to levels comparable to the industrial world. No single measure of modernization captures this transformation, but the literacy rate alone explains most of the difference in fertility rates among Muslim countries. Among the 34 largest Arab countries, just one factor, namely the difference in literacy rates, explains 60% of the difference in the population growth rate in 2005.``

``The population of Somalia, where only a quarter of adults can read, is growing at an enormous 4% per year. At that rate, the number of Somalis will double in just 18 years. But in Algeria, where 62% of adults can read, the population growth rate is only 1.4% per year. At that rate it would take 50 years for the population to double. Qatar, with a literacy rate close to 80%, has a population growth rate of just 1.2%.``

Re: # 67

masadi on December 10, 2005 11:51pm PT
``most of the increase will be in the poor countries...``

Yes, in the poor and the ``ignorant`` countries. High birth rates prevail in those countries characterized by ignorance and poverty, while birth rates decline in those countries with increasing levels of education. Not incidentally, religious affiliation also declines as education levels increase. The prospects don`t hold out much promise for those of us hoping for more sanity in the world. Who are the most easily led, those most subject to the demagogues siren song? The poor, the ignorant, the rabidly religious.
mirmir

Population- http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/in_depth/1194030.stm

#66, in the next 50 years according to UN & US Census Bureau estimates, we will add another 4 billion people to the already over 6 billion on earth, most of the increase will be in the poor countries- and as I mention I do not see this colonial nation state system existing or surviving this increase, merely due to the inability of the poor countries to provide for their populations- the status quo of US hegemony and domination of trade will eventually collapse after this ``human hell``, people are suffering today, more than half of the world`s population lives on less than $2 a day with many on less than $1 a day, unless we work to change things now, change will come but it will be more painful. And ofcourse when US hegemony passes so too will the state of Israel, whether people like it or not, unless Israel is smart enough to make peace, a just peace with the Palestinians and the surrounding Arab states.

masadi #65

`` you`re wrong once again, I`m looking 50 years into the future and you`re looking 50 years into the past. Due to demographic pressure, the status quo cannot continue; not in Israel and neither in Pakistan which will have 300 million plus in 2050-, nor in India. Unless the agenda of the US elite of bleeding the poor countries stops, we are in for a major disaster, the coming ``human hell``. For one thing, this artificial colonial nation-state system is going to collapse, taking Israel with it ``

Israel + Pakistan != world

Most of the powerful states in the world - USA, China, Russia, Europe, India (partially), Brazil have stable populations.

#64, you`re wrong once again, I`m looking 50 years into the future and you`re looking 50 years into the past. Due to demographic pressure, the status quo cannot continue; not in Israel and neither in Pakistan which will have 300 million plus in 2050-, nor in India. Unless the agenda of the US elite of bleeding the poor countries stops, we are in for a major disaster, the coming ``human hell``. For one thing, this artificial colonial nation-state system is going to collapse, taking Israel with it

#63 by masadi on December 9, 2005 10:09pm PT


demographically speaking,


the Israelis will only tolerate that upto a point beyond which they`ll create a new demographic reality like Pakistan has created in Azad Kashmir and China has created in Tibet..

If your ``Plan for victory`` is copulation-procreation-Islamic revolution, you`ll be dissapointed..

#62, unfortunately for you, the ``might is right`` claim is not going to work in Israel`s favor- demographically speaking, Israel is in a state of total loss unless it makes a just peace with the Arabs (not Ay-rabs as you state; you wouldn`t like others using racial slurs against you, so don`t use them for others, merely proves you`re ignorant)

#61 by masadi on December 9, 2005 8:48pm PT


the Palestine/Israel question is very simple


Yes..it`s simple..might is right..If the ay-rabs had won any war against Israel, we wouldn`t be having this discussion..

Jews DID live on that land thousands of years ago and if they won it back fair and square(or otherwise), their ability to retain that land is what gives them the right to do so...

viewers on here, the Palestine/Israel question is very simple, and it is viewed as very simple by leading historians. I gave reference of Oxford historian, Jew, Avi Shlaim, of Israeli right wing historian Benny Morris, of Oxford historian, Albert Hourani- these are authorities in the field, unlike the right wing terrorist group of Kahane in New York. Ignoring all this, our apologist for Israel denies the existance of Palestine and the Palestinian Arabs- not only is this nonsense, it is absurd.

In the 1948 war that Israel won, and Israel had numerical superiority in the field of battle contrary to popular mythology of the little David beating the big Goliath, it expelled over 700,000 indigeneous Arabs of palestine from that area. The UN partition mandate of 1947 gave the implanted Israeli entity 55% of historical Palestine even though their population was third of the population of the region and most were immigrants from outside. Now, after siding with Britain and attacking Egypt in 1956- a preemptive aggressive war, it preemtively attacked the Arabs in 1967 and captured the rest of the 45% of historical Palestine that was given by the UN to the Palestinian Arabs. In Oslo in 1993, the Palestinian leadership told Israel that they will accept that it keep instead of 55%, 78% of historical palestine and let them have 22% out of the 45% that they were given by the UN. Israel has refused and doesnt want peace, simple as that.

The UN resolution 242, asks as POINT NUMBER 1, for Israel to give back the territories it captured in 1967. Israel refuses that. After POINT NUMBER 1 is fulfilled, the UN asks ALL of the neighbouring countries including Israel to recognize the soverignity of the others.

In Palestine, (a historical entity under both the Ottomans and the British, that had indigeneous Palestinian Arabs living there for centuries, over 13 centuries- the vast majority of them), we have a simple case of an occupying FORCE and an occupied people. The cause of the conflict is the occupation, the Israelis dont want to get rid of the cause but they want to get rid of the effect, i.e. the Palestinian liberation struggle. That is not possible and morally reprehensible because what that means is that they want to continue the occupation and also want the Palestinians to be happy in their impoverished and subjugated state. I reject that, the Palestinians reject that and ALL people of conscience in the world regardless of religion, and nationality ALSO reject that. We see the empirical proof of this in the UN voting on resolutions against the Israeli oppression. Except for the US and Israel and a couple of island states, no one sides with the Israelis in their oppression of the Palestinians. This is the simple case which is being deliberately clouded and masked by the supporters of colonialism and US hegemony like behram 1.

#59, all these questions on trivia are irrelevant, you want to force a narrow definition of nation state, like these idiots on Kahane. A country does not need a founder by the way, Palestine was marked as a legal entity during the Ottomon times and the British identified it as such, you want to research the particulars do it on your own time, I have no concern or desire to waste my time going through the trivia details when the entity is clearly identified as having existence in major historical documents, including the Balfour declaration, as do its people. There were many census studies, of PALESTINE, go through them on your own time and you will conclude just like the historians I mentioned that the majority in that area were the Arab palestinians who identified themselves as falasteeney.

Since you dont have any respect for historical scholarship and rely on cheap stunts like quoting extreme right wing Israeli websites, there is not much we can communicate over. Just look at this nonsense, the ``exchange rate`` compared to the dollar- what kind of garbage is that? Palestine predates the US, and why do exchange rates matter in whether there was a Palestine or not? These are just distraction tactics. You can go through the British trade records with that area and you can possibly figure those out. Do that on your own time. Historians have already looked at all this that is why they dismiss as ABSURD any conclusion that denies that there was a Palestine or that there were no Palestinian Arabs. This is just gibberish and absurdity on your part. I wont waste time trying to prove to you that 1+1=2 when you are concluding 1+1= anything but 2

Ask any of these questions to a US college graduate about the US and chances are he or she cannot answer them, does that mean there is no US or that no Americans exist. Don`t be absurd.

masadi: You will not be allowed to weezel out of this one. Answer some of the questions on the historical country that you called Palestine (on the other site)

PALESTINE THE COUNTRY???

If you are so sure that Palestine, the country, goes back through most of recorded history, I expect you to be able to answer a few basic questions about that country:

· When was it founded and by whom?
· What were its borders?
· What was its capital?
· What were its major cities?
· What constituted the basis of its economy?
· What was its form of government?
· Can you name at least one Palestinian leader before Arafat?
· Was Palestine ever recognized by a country whose existence, at that time or now, leaves no room for interpretation?
· What was the language of the country of Palestine?
· What was the prevalent religion of the country of Palestine?
· What was the name of its currency?

· Choose any date in history and tell what was the approximate exchange rate of the Palestinian monetary unit against the US dollar, German mark, GB pound, Japanese yen, or Chinese Yuan on that date.

· And, finally, since there is no such country today, what caused its demise and when did it occur?

· If you are lamenting the low sinking of a once proud nation, please tell me, when exactly was that nation proud and what was it so proud of?

· And here is the least sarcastic question of all: If the people you mistakenly call Palestinians are anything but generic Arabs collected from all over -- or thrown out of -- the Arab world, if they really have a genuine ethnic identity that gives them right for self-determination, why did they never try to become independent until Arabs suffered their devastating defeat in the Six Day War?

I hope you avoid the temptation to trace the modern day Palestinians to the Biblical Philistines: substituting etymology for history will not work here.

The truth should be obvious to everyone who wants to know it. Arab countries have never abandoned the dream of destroying Israel; they still cherish it today. Having time and again failed to achieve their evil goal with military means, they decided to fight Israel by proxy.

For that purpose, they created a terrorist organization, cynically called it the Palestinian people and installed it in Gaza, Judea, and Samaria. How else can you explain the refusal by Jordan and Egypt to unconditionally accept back the West Bank and Gaza, respectively?

http://jdl.org.il/palestine_the_country.htm

#57 masadi: Abbey oye magaz ka bawaseer.... So when are you going to address my post #56? I want in simple English and not some stupid academic BS, stating empirical study and all that crap. As I had a very simple question.... why is it different when Arabs attacked and destroyed the Persian dynasty? Have you read Firduasi`s Shahnama? And how glorius the Persian Dynasty was? eh!

#56, I address viewers on here not the hypocrite behram1. The British destroyed India`s industry, stole its resources, ruthlessly killed the indigenous people, treated them like vermin, pushed them back a hundred years, implanted their sick capitalistic culture on them, played one group against the other, cultivated religious hatred and then when they left, they left an unfinished mess that has described the lives of the region ever since.

# 55 masadi: Arabs have never cherished anything in the earlier years. They were ruthless as was shown abundantly clear in Karbala....

[Just because the Muslims cherished the learning of other cultures, translated it, built upon it and shared it, you say that is theft? Garbage.] Wah reh wah... Only the converted Persians knew then and they know it now, how to develop from within. Arabs knew none of these enlightened ways of living in the modern world at the time. And that is why they robbed and pillaged, and attacked. So much so that Haluka had to be called for help from distant place. And these Arabs still don`t.

[Theft is what your colonial masters did in India when they destroyed its industry, an industry that was more developed -under the Muslims that is- than the British textile industry- that is theft!] What Arabs did, you do not call it theft. BTW, Arabs could not steal astronomy/astrology from the Persians because it conflicted with their new belief system. And what the British did you call it theft. Why?

#46, your understanding is totally skewed. Just because the Muslims cherished the learning of other cultures, translated it, built upon it and shared it, you say that is theft? Garbage. Theft is what your colonial masters did in India when they destroyed its industry, an industry that was more developed -under the Muslims that is- than the British textile industry- that is theft!

#44. It is not merely the arms lobby. It is the entire economic structure of the US that has been transformed post world war 2 into a ``permanent war economy``, look at the 2006 discretionary budget of the US, it spends more on defense than on ALL other programs combined. Similarly the interchangibility that exists among the leaders of the military, industry and government eg those that are CEOs like Cheney become vice presidents or cabinet members, those in the military like Powell become industry captians being on the board of Time Warner etc and then enter the president`s cabinet etc results in a fusion of views- that regardless of the regime in charge, democratic or republican, results in similar outcomes on the world scene and foreign policy. There is no substantive democracy in the US. A rationalized bureaucratic society, with rules governing every aspect of life from birth to death cannot be a free society, it cannot be a democratic society. Modern sociologists like Ritzer refer to it as the McDonaldization of Society. How the world preceives America, through the media propaganda and what America is in fact are two different things- sometimes the reality becomes all too obvious when, as you mention, it flexes its muscle.

What has happened in modern bureaucratic societies, that parade as democracies (like the USA), is that the chance to reason and the ability to be free has been lost (see http://robots.asadi.org) that is the nature of a bureaucratic society: a society where standardization is the norm and the person is surrounded by rules that govern behavior from birth to death. Such ``democracies`` exists in form only and not in essence, here choices are not formulated by a ``public`` but rather insinuated upon a highly propagandized ``mass society`` that knows next to nothing regarding public issues. This is achieved by control of the ``cultural apparatus`` by a small aristocracy, the Power Elite. The ``cultural apparatus``- language, education, status and technology- with the media and the formal educational institutions playing a dominant role, thus ensures that this elite achieves cultural hegemony. The person thinks he or she is free and living under a ``democracy`` but the reality of the situation is much different.