Burma massacre

When making a post, please ensure it complies with this site's Main Rules at all times.
  • As I am not a Christian I do not care about any theocratic aspects of societies dominated by these as the political weapon of control.

    Ideology can be as perilous as religion in this regard. Seldom do the actual people and nation have anything to do with why and how its leaders tend to act.

    Islam in the west is a peril yet unknown to liberals and so they scuttle about with their new age lefty supporters bothering about nazis and racists when in fact a different and real threat hovers over them like the proverbial Damocletian sword. They're idiots with a capital "I".

    I agree that the terms "liberal" and "fascist" are incompatible with regard to their definitions but neo-liberals have managed to combine them, possibly by means of a degraded Christianity based on caritas in a secular expression and sheer moral supremacy that has made some of them actually state that they think they are the evolution of an improved human species that is destined to rule the world on account of their attainment of moral beatitude in their planned Republic of Heaven on earth.

    If one has a discrepancy like that motivating one's thinking and action, the results can only be disastrous at best and catastrophic at worst.

    What a way to start the day! an espresso + croissant + a shot of Neo Fascist Liberalism. And it’s foggy outside, meteorologically and metaphorically.

    I’m not a christian. Which is why, when defending the values of a christian society, I have to keep preventing MS Word from correcting to an upper case C. I’m with Woody Allen who couldn’t decide whether to raise one’s kids as atheists or agnostics.

    I dissociate from any religious beliefs. For goodness sake, don’t people know what’s right and what’s wrong without having to go to a place of worship?

    I nonetheless admire the French version of Roman Catholicism which is exceptionally non-prescriptive, chiming with their admirable laissez faire live-&-let-live secularity. It is tragic that, with such an enlightened outlook, France should have let itself over the years be lumbered with so many Muslims.

    I suppose that is what happens when a succession of elected governments keep oscillating between neo fascist liberalism and right-wing authoritarianism. One can understand how this creates disillusion, distrust and resigned acquiescence among older citizens and unrest among younger citizens, mutating into civil disorder and mob rule, euphemised as “popular democracy”. (Q: What are you rebelling against? A: What have you got?). So-called idealism is powered by G.A.S (Group Accepted Sentiments), regressing into manic ideology.

    Into this void of irrationalism it is easy to see how Political Correctness flourishes and mutates into Neo Liberal Fascism in the West and Neo Islamism in the Middle and Far East, leaving a disheartened, frightened, nervous silent majority of “non-believers/infidels, who keep a low profile, or go with the flow or, heaven help us, actually believe the ideology and assume it reflects society’s new precepts. This is how World Order degenerates and either rises out of the ruins into something better or settles into a dystopian Brave New World, a negative Utopia.

    What do those who are concerned actually do about this?

    - Intellectually analyse it to death? I suppose even negative stimulation is better than no stimulation.

    - Start another social media that is merely a smaller newer me-too of Facebook or Twitter? In other words, try and make hay while the sun is setting but still shining, while console oneself with the fact that there is mortality?

    - Start another social media (or smarter still, a sub-forum) that targets and engages with young people who rightly feel disenfranchised. Through an exchange of ideas, telling it as it really is, this could progress towards a new enlightenment. (One thing is for sure, without a full complement of government-paid bodyguards surrounding a circumspect Salman Rushdie life-style, staying online with a pseudonym will remain the order of the day – and it will probably need to comprise long conversational threads of briefly-stated digestible thoughts
    that can build up rather than yawn-making commentaries from prehistorics like me, which will be largely ignored..

  • I have given up with politics as a solution to human dilemmas. (I gave up on most humans as rational beings some time ago.)

    I don't know what to do about mob civilizations (excuse contradiction). They are becoming a feature of a new kind of imperialism that is aspiring to global control. At fist this was based in "concern", then it moved on to a sense of moral rectitude, crocodile tearful distress at man's inhumanity to man and has since moved into ferocious retributive mode. That is what seems to characterise the neo-liberal fascist today. Classic Liberalism has been swept under the carpet and "liberalism" has become a tool for cultural supremacy that is underpinned by draconian law. (The old Socialists have gone into the dustballs under the carpet along with much else as they are of no further use to the new strident hard-faced liberal elite.)

    In this respect, some of the elements of dystopian and post-apocalyptic fiction have been made manifest.

    I once came out to fight against this, got trolled to death, am still being stalked and lied about and have since returned to my writing and art. Would I do it all again?

    Absolutely not. :(

  • Bob Geldof has said he will return his Freedom of the City of Dublin in protest against the Myanmar leader Aung San Suu Kyi, who also holds the award.

    Mr Geldof said "her association with our city shames us all".

    I know he's a big gob and it certainly won't make a difference to what happens in Burma, but I did cheer a little when I read this story.

    If its not already clear from my opinions already expressed here, I think the West has given a Aung San Suu Kyi a green-light to the behaviour of "her" military in Burma and the genocide of the Rohingya. At least Uncle Bob is drawing attention to this fact.

  • ....no he didn't.

    Bangladesh has signed a deal with Myanmar to return hundreds of thousands of Rohingya Muslims who fled a recent army crackdown.

    A statement from the Bangladesh foreign ministry said displaced people could begin to return within two months.

    If I were a Rohingya, I wouldn't go back to Burma. Not a cat's chance in hell. Would you?

    What happens if they refuse to go back?

  • It is worth remembering that the visit of Pope Francis to Myanmar was planned well before the Rohingya refugee crisis erupted in August.

    It was intended to upgrade diplomatic ties between the Holy See and Myanmar, and to enhance the status of the small Roman Catholic community in the country, many of whom come from other vulnerable minorities.

    I don't care if this trip was planned ages ago or not, but the Pope going to Burma after they've murdered many Rohingya is disgusting and what does the media focus on, not the visit itself, but his omission of the word Rohingya from his speech.X(

  • I think one of the problems is that Bangladesh doesn't want them. They are in a precarious situation and I think that of Islamist insurgents hadn't infiltrated and raped Buddhist women and killed Buddhist soldiers they may have got away with being able to stay.

    The Pope is a pain in the arse and should go back to his luxurious Palace in Rome, full of golden treasures, and he should visit the churches of his religion whose artefacts are gilded in gold stolen from the South American natives the invading Spanish murdered.

  • I disagree. The Pope would never sanction genocide.

    I think that religion should keep well out of political issues and the Rohingya episode is a political issue. The Pope is neither a Buddhist nor a Muslim and although he may be there to safeguard a minority of Catholics, getting involved on a partisan basis isn't a good idea as killing people amounts to killing people, no matter who they might be.

    The reasons why people are killed in a way that causes this to be labelled "genocide" is where those who are keen to prevent it should be looking. As there is always an underlying problem with usually historical roots that causes the conflict. I don't think that kind of thing can be solved by Pop stars, priests, celebs or multiculturalist promoters. It is a worldwide problem and rooted in the diversity of ethnicities and their rights to practise their cultures and religion. When one group develops an insurgency problem and the host nation or majority culture starts getting attacked by this, then it is not rocket science to understand how an older clash of cultures or beliefs might resurface and get nasty.

    If the Pope can solve that, then good luck to him. 8)

  • Damning UN report on Burma genocide

    I imagine charges will now be laid in the International Criminal Court against the military leaders, but what about Aung San Suu Kyi, the great peacemaker and Nobel price winner?

    Whether she supported the killings or not, she has chosen to remain as president of that country, in effect giving legitimacy to the military rulers to do whatever the hell that want, and they have.

    Shouldn't she be tried of war crimes too?

  • Enoch Powell's dystopian prediction of Rivers of Blood could apply to any country's government that chooses to ignore, dismiss or even outlaw voices of consternation and fear of its citizens. By holding down that lid, the contents will eventually reach boiling point and erupt, after which there is no going back. Enoch's over-colourful unedifying prediction has come true in Burma and is bubbling along in Europe, certainly including Britain. There is no question in my mind that if in Europe, with its head in the sand, it become a battle between Islamists and Ostriches, it will be a walkover for Islamists.

    Burma's act of genocide is more than a River of Blood horror story. It is a symptom of a deeper problem which no one is inclined to explore or, if they have, dare not open it up for discussion in this aggressively PC society, let alone propose a solution.

    Let me have a go at what lies beneath by throwing a few unpalatable thoughts into the melting pot:

    1) Aung San Suu Kyi, is forced to be just a puppet. Although no longer under house arrest, heaven help her if she deviates one iota from the junta's script

    2) When anger boils over and one develops hatred towards others, one can also hate oneself for feeling compelled or under orders to act ruthlessly against those you hate. To avoid this self-hate devouring you, there becomes a need to hate the people you are killing or mistreating even more than you hate yourself. This spirals upwards, where you hate them even more for causing you to hate yourself - this brings some relief and enables you to end up behaving atrociously and telling yourself that "they had it coming". It helps a great deal if you feel "at home" in the military because that cultivates unthinking heartless obedience and a penchant for violence and blood lust, which is a darker side of human nature than can easily reach a barbaric level.

    What brings about this escalation from prejudice to discomfort to anxiety to hatred to barbarism?

    3) It didn't help when Burma tried to satisfy those who represented over 90% of its citizens (Buddhists) by recognising that they had primary citizenship status and that other ethnic groups has secondary or associate citizenship status.

    4) It didn't help that Burma has 8 indigenous races subdivided into 135 ethnic groups but in spite of that has commonality in the form of over 90% of its citizens being Buddhist and therefore it is understandable that Burma would seek to preserve that commonality.

    5) It didn't help that Rohingyans virulently opposed this government decision and demanded full citizenship when they are Muslim and the country is over 90% Buddhist, which gave the Burmese government all the excuse or justification they needed to withhold citizenship from Rohingyans.

    6) It didn't help that the Rohingyans were insisting that their right to citizenship was based on having been established as citizens in Burma since the 8th century or 12th century when subsequent events in the 20th and 21st centuries contradicted or nullified such debatable, controversial or irrelevant ancestry.

    7) It didn't help that Rohingyans had a birth rate 50% higher than Buddhists. One doesn't need a degree in advanced maths to figure out the long-term implications of that simple fact.

    8} It didn't help that Rohingyans created a subgroup called Arakan Rohingya Salvation Army (ARSA) whom in spite of such a kind peaceful brand name association and a claimed aim of peaceful support for the needs of Rohingyans, committed acts of atrocity that rivalled that of the Burmese Army.

    9) It didn't help calm Buddhist apprehensions that ARSA was supported and funded by Saudi Arabia whose steadfast aim is Islamic hegemony.

    10) It didn't help ease the apprehension of Burma's Army (who do not have massive defence resources) that Islam generally and ISIS specifically could soon decide that the turmoil created by a Rohingyan-Muslim spearhead, spurred by ARSA, would lead to an opportunity for an Islamic incursion that would make the Rohingyan foot-shuffling return into Burma seem like a school picnic.

    11) It didn’t help that all the UN can contribute to this horrific and dangerous mess is to blather on about genocide. The UN remains as useless as they always have been and probably always will be, an obstacle to world peace, arguably even a blight on the human race. China and Russia have vetoed whatever meaningless proposal was tabled by the UN. Has anyone asked Russia or China why they vetoed the proposal?

    Edited once, last by casablanca (August 29, 2018 at 8:48 PM).

  • Mrs president is more than just a puppet, she is quite the ardent nationalist.

    I don't blame her. Ardent Nationalism can be a good thing. Especially when one considers the alternative. We need more ardent nationalism in Europe.

    The worse thing about Enoch Powell's speech is that he gave Nationalism a bad name

    Edited once, last by Horizon: moved help request talk to help forum (August 31, 2018 at 3:53 PM).

  • We'll take everything about that speech and related matters to our usual place, otherwise it will all get into a mess here, as this thread needs to remain about Burma:

    The Great Debate on Immigration, Race and Religion in the UK

    I'll pick it up your points there tomorrow, as I'm a bit tired now. I was actually re-reading his speech today, so I'm fully prepared.:)

  • The military in Burma control the ministeries that really matter so I don't think she has that much power to actually change anything. I also suspect that if she did challenge the military she'd be out of office and back under house arrest PDQ

  • The military in Burma control the ministeries that really matter so I don't think she has that much power to actually change anything. I also suspect that if she did challenge the military she'd be out of office and back under house arrest PDQ.

    I buy Horizon assessment that she's a nationalist at heart, like her father, and I also suspect she only got jailed because the military realised she was making a pitch to get elected on a mainstream democracy platform (and was being feted by the west for that) and Burma's military realised that Burma needs Western democracy like a hole in the head.

    Edited once, last by Horizon: moved help request talk to help forum (August 31, 2018 at 3:54 PM).

  • The military in Burma control the ministeries that really matter so I don't think she has that much power to actually change anything. I also suspect that if she did challenge the military she'd be out of office and back under house arrest PDQ.

    I don't disagree with that, but that is exactly what should've happened then.

    No matter what, her name is on the president's door. The mass murders are being done in her name. She should resign if she had a decent bone in her body, but as I mentioned to Rob, ultimately like her father, she is a ardent nationalist too, not quite the Nobel peace winner.

  • I don't disagree with that, but that is exactly what should've happened then.

    No matter what, her name is on the president's door. The mass murders are being done in her name. She should resign if she had a decent bone in her body, but as I mentioned to Rob, ultimately like her father, she is a ardent nationalist too, not quite the Nobel peace winner.

    I suppose it i inevitable that Nationalism gets a bad rap because, both in both sound and meaning, it is so closely associated with Nazism.

    Do you think we need a new label to describe what an ever-increasing proportion of Western citizens believe in, which is to live in a society that is not being challenged, invaded, terrorised and killed by an entirely different "society" that has uncivilised medieval fanatical beliefs which are the antithesis of practically everything we stand for and aspire to be?

    Edited once, last by Horizon: moved help request talk to help forum (August 31, 2018 at 3:54 PM).

  • Do you think we need a new label to describe what an ever-increasing proportion of Western citizens believe in, which is to live in a society that is not being challenged, invaded, terrorised and killed by an entirely different "society" that has uncivilised medieval fanatical beliefs which are the antithesis of practically everything we stand for and aspire to be?

    Nationalism is fine, but when it leads to genocide it's not.

    I'm still pondering your post #32. THere are a lot of excellent points there and I had never heard of ARSA before, despite reading a few articles regarding Burma.

    I think this sentence, though, is a very good question:

    What brings about this escalation from prejudice to discomfort to anxiety to hatred to barbarism?

    But I think your point No 2 just before you wrote this is a cop out for those committing evil.

    When these genocides happen, it's not usually masses of people carrying out the killings, but instruments of the State like the military or the police, although that still does not explain their evil acts.

    My own conclusion, thus far, as to why they do it, is because they want to. They get bored and they want a "easy" solution.

    I shall continue to ponder this as it goes to the crux of a lot of issues in the world and I will get into the Rivers of Blood speech at some point too over in the immigration thread.

Participate now!

Don’t have an account yet? Register yourself now and be a part of our community!