As much of an atheist anti-religious person that I am...
That's called anti-theism, not atheism.
I can't shake the feeling that the secularisation of society has left a large hole somewhere.
I totally agree about the hole.
Those who in earlier times were the highly educated "moderate" religionists (Anglicans, Methodists, Presbyterians, Unitarians, etc) have mostly stopped going to church, and those who stayed (evangelicals, pentecostals, "brown people" churches) have become more radicalized because of the Culture War.
And aspirational goals are fine... but they will never fix human nature.
I don't think you know what the word "aspire" means. Otherwise you wouldn't have written, "and all the humans will act thusly".
The point of Churches, patriotic songs and "the Protestant Work Ethic" was to try to change behavior, and set goals that people should attempt to attain. And why Church is every week, instead of foolishness like a one-off D.A.R.E. campaign.
That's why we have police, prisons, armies, and all sorts of things.
That's why we had Churches, patriotic songs and "the Protestant Work Ethic".
It was all hypocrisy, but it spoke of aspirational goals; what we should be like, even if we weren't.
Now it's multiculturalism, snark, Open Borders and a huge prison population because there aren't any broadly agreed upon social goals except, "give me more money".
The real problem here is that society and the economy is based on infinite growth and consumption.
And yet the alternatives are either as moonbeam unrealistic ("true" socialism) as bitcoins, or too horrible to consider (completely nuking high density countries like China, India, Indonesia, Bangladesh, Mexico).
Maybe it's just because no-one knows what they're actually called
Someone knows what they're officially called. In fact, I'd wager that lots of people know, and that it's damned easy to find out with 10 seconds of googling.
The fundamental problem, though, is that the only way to actually stop a country from doing what you don't want them to do is to successfully invade it. Otherwise -- since sanctions and negotiations are of limited effect -- if they're really motivated, they're going to do it.
Of course, invasions have their own set of problems; successful American invasions have a jillion more problems, and invading the DPRK has about a jillion squared problems (not the least of which that Seoul is within reach of DPRK rocket artillery.
there are world courts so you could see things like sanctions if they didn't.
My faith in the efficacy of world courts is pretty damned minimal. Since Japan has been so effective at neutering the International Whaling Commission, my faith that Japan would accept and enforce the ruling of a world court ruling regarding them fishing in someone else's marine reserve is zero.
You're not very familiar with international law or maritime law, are you?
So a fishing fleet owner can be sued in England, lose, and the Japanese government will seize the assets and transfer them to the Crown (or wherever seized assets in the UK go)?
You're the same person that said, "Well, I can just make my own drone and those drone laws can't stop me!" Aren't you?
Unless I've got an acute case of Alzheimer's Syndrome, "no".
Funny how that works and yet we still have those laws. I'll see if you can figure out why on your own.
What's the purpose of having a law if you can't/won't enforce it?
Slashdot Mirror
Good. It always helps to put some good, healthy fear into the enemy.
There is no hole, you have been brain washed into believing the religious bullshit.
1) Brainwashing is what parents -- and societies -- *do*. It's what makes societies continue from one generation to another.
2) "Supernatural agency" appears to be an emergent property of our large brains. (IOW, it's *built in* to most people.) Religion follows from there.
The fascists running the 3rd Reich also claimed that fresh air and vigorous physical activity were good for you.
that is what needs to be reworked.
Better minds than your's have tried. And failed spectacularly.
I'm flat out saying any system which either HOPES everyone...
Neither am I. Both of your screeds are boxing at shadows.
As much of an atheist anti-religious person that I am ...
That's called anti-theism, not atheism.
I can't shake the feeling that the secularisation of society has left a large hole somewhere.
I totally agree about the hole.
Those who in earlier times were the highly educated "moderate" religionists (Anglicans, Methodists, Presbyterians, Unitarians, etc) have mostly stopped going to church, and those who stayed (evangelicals, pentecostals, "brown people" churches) have become more radicalized because of the Culture War.
Nothing good is going to come of this, IMO.
And aspirational goals are fine ... but they will never fix human nature.
I don't think you know what the word "aspire" means. Otherwise you wouldn't have written, "and all the humans will act thusly".
The point of Churches, patriotic songs and "the Protestant Work Ethic" was to try to change behavior, and set goals that people should attempt to attain. And why Church is every week, instead of foolishness like a one-off D.A.R.E. campaign.
That's why we have police, prisons, armies, and all sorts of things.
That's why we had Churches, patriotic songs and "the Protestant Work Ethic".
It was all hypocrisy, but it spoke of aspirational goals; what we should be like, even if we weren't.
Now it's multiculturalism, snark, Open Borders and a huge prison population because there aren't any broadly agreed upon social goals except, "give me more money".
The real problem here is that society and the economy is based on infinite growth and consumption.
And yet the alternatives are either as moonbeam unrealistic ("true" socialism) as bitcoins, or too horrible to consider (completely nuking high density countries like China, India, Indonesia, Bangladesh, Mexico).
the enjoyment of at least a portion of one's time, be it at work or play, is an important element in a functional society.
While true, that's not what GP wrote.
We realized it is more fun to have more ...
Unfortunately, fun does not perpetuate a functional society.
It is believed
By whom, and with what evidence?
There's no indication that this was a single conversation. It might have been 40,
Europeans are slow like that... LOL
Thank you.
But now we know that literal translations are sometimes a Bad Thing.
Maybe it's just because no-one knows what they're actually called
Someone knows what they're officially called. In fact, I'd wager that lots of people know, and that it's damned easy to find out with 10 seconds of googling.
So-called?
WTF with the scare phrase?
I suspect (DPRK getting nuked) is what would happen if North Korea allowed any of its nuclear bombs to be used
Unfortunately, the DPRK is waaaay too close to too many other people that we aren't at war with.
The fundamental problem, though, is that the only way to actually stop a country from doing what you don't want them to do is to successfully invade it. Otherwise -- since sanctions and negotiations are of limited effect -- if they're really motivated, they're going to do it.
Of course, invasions have their own set of problems; successful American invasions have a jillion more problems, and invading the DPRK has about a jillion squared problems (not the least of which that Seoul is within reach of DPRK rocket artillery.
Cultural sensitivity?
those are what treaties are for
So... do England and Japan have such a treaty?
there are world courts so you could see things like sanctions if they didn't.
My faith in the efficacy of world courts is pretty damned minimal. Since Japan has been so effective at neutering the International Whaling Commission, my faith that Japan would accept and enforce the ruling of a world court ruling regarding them fishing in someone else's marine reserve is zero.
You're not very familiar with international law or maritime law, are you?
So a fishing fleet owner can be sued in England, lose, and the Japanese government will seize the assets and transfer them to the Crown (or wherever seized assets in the UK go)?
You're the same person that said, "Well, I can just make my own drone and those drone laws can't stop me!" Aren't you?
Unless I've got an acute case of Alzheimer's Syndrome, "no".
Funny how that works and yet we still have those laws. I'll see if you can figure out why on your own.
What's the purpose of having a law if you can't/won't enforce it?
You realise the Australians do exactly that - intercept modern factory fishing boats - just as much as "rickety old things".
Good for them. But Oz isn't England.
And no, they don't want to hand Gibraltar back to Spain, quite the opposite in-fact...
This is old, but I bet the same attitudes still exist in the Foreign Office.
Being from a different country does not give you a free pass to violate the local laws.
But it doesn't give you jurisdiction to seize assets in another country.
The Navy?
In 2016, do they even have the money to train in gunnery?