I first became acquainted with his writings when a friend recommended his book, "Sapiens," to me. Read it. It's wonderful.
Harari is an historian and professor in the Department of History at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem.
I've listened to his podcasts and lectures (many can be found on YouTube.)
Here is his opinion piece in the Washington Post.
And here's the quote we should all pay attention to:
The real explanation for Israel’s dysfunction is populism rather than any alleged immorality. For many years, Israel has been governed by a populist strongman, Benjamin Netanyahu, who is a public-relations genius but an incompetent prime minister. He has repeatedly preferred his personal interests over the national interest and has built his career on dividing the nation against itself. He has appointed people to key positions based on loyalty more than qualifications, took credit for every success while never taking responsibility for failures, and seemed to give little importance to either telling or hearing the truth.
The coalition Netanyahu established in December 2022 has been by far the worst. It is an alliance of messianic zealots and shameless opportunists, who ignored Israel’s many problems — including the deteriorating security situation — and focused instead on grabbing unlimited power for themselves. In pursuit of this goal, they adopted extremely divisive policies, spread outrageous conspiracy theories about state institutions that oppose their policies, and labeled the country’s serving elites as “deep state” traitors.
55 comments:
Tuberville makes morons look brilliant:
GOP Sen. Tuberville on standing with our allies or with terrorists: “When you start picking sides in the Middle East, it can get really messy very quick”
Nice "Christian"woman says this about a mother's cry for help:
Woman in Gaza: “Can you imagine that we are living without power or water in the 21st Century? My baby has run out of nappies and there is only half a bottle of milk left,” said Waad al-Mughrabi as she looked at the destroyed building next to her home in Rimal.
“Was it my child who attacked Israel?”
Nice Christian woman: Boo-effing-hoo. The Hamas weapons are embedded in Gaza.
So, says Nice Christian Woman, your innocent baby deserves to die!
These people vote! And admire Donald Trump!
You've read Geeez today. Good for you!
How many sympathetic self-righteous Jihadi's will attack in America tomorrow? That's the question you should be asking yourself. But you can comfort yourself in knowing that 3/4 of US domestic security personnel will be dutifully monitoring parents that protested at their child's last school board meeting over "My Two Daddy's" books in the school library.
-FJ: "How many sympathetic self-righteous Jihadi's will attack in America tomorrow?"
Are you among the cynical and America-haters who are hoping for this? It seems so. To prove what? That the 2020 election was "stollen?"
Yes. I read Geeez often to see what the anti-democracy (and often racist) whackos are saying and who they're hating. They never disappoint. Ms. Nice Christian lady mocked a mother who is desperate to save her child, and blames the mother and child because terrorists were among them in Gaza. So, sure, to hell with the mother and child.
Those are HER Christian values.
-FJ: "...US domestic security personnel will be dutifully monitoring parents that protested at their child's last school board meeting over "My Two Daddy's" books in the school library."
What a bunch of malarkey!
In response to Shaw's questions...I think FJ, (aka JC, Anonymous) just might be.
The rightwing, especially the MAGA'ts in congress, are bent o bringing down our democratic republic, if they succeed they will attempt to install a fascist strong arm dictator. It is the purpose of their chaotic non governing tactics.
Les, the problem with your "democratic republic" is that it is neither.
Those are HER Christian values.
In fairness to HER. From her "good book", 2 Kings 8:12- And Hazael said, Why weepeth my lord? And he answered, Because I know the evil that thou wilt do unto the children of Israel: their strong holds wilt thou set on fire, and their young men wilt thou slay with the sword, and wilt dash their children, and rip up their women with child.
Barbarism has defined fundamentalist Abrahamic religions for millennia.
Barbarism has defined secular atheistic societies for centuries (WWI-II/Korea/Vietnam/ etc.)
And so, an admission. Thanks for you honesty anyway. So long...
LOL!
Poor woman. She and her baby are being used as human shields by her own Hamas Government. Shes' no better off than an Israeli or American hostage. *tsk-tsk*
If Hamas had any honour, they'd meet the IDF on the plains before Gaza in a field of their choosing in open combat. But they cravenly hide amongst the women and children instead. *tesk-effen-tsk*
It's the kind of behaviour that you'd expect from cockroaches, not MEN!
It's possible to think Hamas are terrorists, Israel has a right to defend itself and not be callously indifferent to innocent human suffering. I understand there will be innocent lives lost but to openly mock that woman as if she chose her circumstance is a special kind of inhumanity. I'm just speculating that the reason the good Christian woman over at Mz Z, and you, can justify their ridicule by following the example of their/your petty, vindictive, murderous war lord who created the universe. Just a thought.
BTW. Atheism is not a governing philosophy, it's just non belief in a deity. Secular governments are non Theocracies. Blaming them for the atrocities of the 20th century is really weak. The lamest kind of apologist BS. LOL, *tesk-effen-tsk*.
The atheism within liberalism, is indeed a "governing philosophy". According to Nietzsche, it one of the worst, totalitarian, kind. Especially once it has been "achieved" (a liberal government).
Nietzsche - "Twilight of the Idols", "The value of a thing sometimes does not lie in that which one attains by it, but in what one pays for it--what it costs us. I shall give an example. Liberal institutions cease to be liberal as soon as they are attained: later on, there are no worse and no more thorough injurers of freedom than liberal institutions."
I'm NOT a Christian, Craig. I'm a deist. And my G_d doesn't involve himself in the affairs of men or beasts. He doesn't answer "prayers". He merely Created a space in which a Universe could "evolve." And if evolution culls the weak, and the "humanists", so be it. In the meantime, "go team Humanism". You'll soon find out that you can't save them all. Some are just "naturally stupid'. Like Hamas.
The "environment" in which we live is changing. The Neoliberal Unipolar order is collapsing. Multipolarity is emerging. It's time to "evolve". Peak "humanism", along with its' corresponding "rituals", is over.
I never called you a Christian. I called the woman a Z's a Christian because she self identifies as Christian. You call yourself a Jew so I thought the Old Testament might be relevant.
According to Nietzsche
I don't give a shit what Nietzsche has to say about atheism (non belief in god or gods,that's it) or liberalism in the context of 19th century Germany. Maybe you're working on becoming who you really are. Not equipped for empathy.
The cockroach-ish cowardice of Hamas, hiding under the burka's of their own wives and daughters.
And you called "evolution": "your petty, vindictive, murderous war lord". Sound about right? His response, "adapt or die".
Breitbart? LMAO!
Another conspiratorial rag.
And you called "evolution": "your petty, vindictive, murderous war lord". Sound about right?
Um, no. I was trying to defend Christian Woman. Her cruel, sadistic, sociopathic response to the woman who feared for her life and the life of her child is right in line with the god she worships. Defend the tribe and slaughter the "other", innocent or not. 3,000 years, give or take, and the attitude remains the same. I wouldn't call that "evolved".
I have not defended Hamas or condemned Israel for their response. You want to ascribe to me beliefs I don't hold and hit me with epistemologically incoherent drivel from some rabbit hole on the internet. When you line up straw men against me, the idea is to knock 'em down. You failed.
Ditto.
How do you know it's a "He?"
Did your god show up dressed like George Clooney?
No, George Burns. Think of it this way, if the Universe had been Created by a woman, it would have been Perfect, right?
"Think of it this way, if the Universe had been Created by a woman, it would have been Perfect, right?"
The universe was not created by a Man God or Woman God. Period.
Science, Quantum Mechanics and Physics, now postulates the possible creator is actually a "divine" conscienceness that each and every one of us has a part of and is of course connected to the "divine" conscienceness. As well as being interconnected to each other. Individualism is quite possibly nothing more than an ego created yet non existant self. An idea i now personally and fully accept.
Sorry Shaw, i know it's hard to say i simply do not know. But reification of almost any belief system, or lack thereof is quite likely a big mistake.
I forgot to add Shaw that i, like you, do not believe in the god that man created in his own image. That god, created in man's image, would be responsible for much of humankind's suffering. Why? Because evil destructivei men have always quoted the bible or koran.
Les "...i, like you, do not believe in the god that man created in his own image."
Throughout human history, humans have created at least 18,000 different gods. Why?
"Why Do Humans Keep Inventing Gods to Worship?
A recent study points to the role of a specific brain region.
At least 18,000 different gods, goddesses and various animals or objects have been worshipped by humans.
Spirituality, or religiosity, has been mapped to a brain circuit that was centered on a brain region called the periaqueductal grey.
This brain circuit, and the apparent importance of the periaqueductal grey, may have evolved to encourage altruistic behaviors and reduce fear.
The neural substrates of religiosity or spirituality are under investigation by neuroscientists. Evolution has clearly selected a brain that can accept a logically absurd world of supernatural causes and beings. Spirituality must offer something tangible that enhances procreation and survival. Otherwise, evolution should have selected against such costly beliefs and behaviors as making gigantic pyramids to house the dead, blowing oneself up for the pleasures of paradise, or sacrificing one's children as a measure of devotion to one’s deity.
Religious beliefs, spirituality, and the need to worship a deity of some kind are undoubtedly durable traits. Some gods were worshipped for very long periods and then virtually disappeared from the historical record. For example, the sun god Ra was worshipped by many different cultures for thousands of years and then completely disappeared. If historical precedent holds, many of the gods worshipped today will be forgotten and quickly replaced by others."
SOURCE
And this:
"In recent years scientists specializing in the mind have begun to unravel religion’s “DNA.” They have produced robust theories, backed by empirical evidence (including “imaging” studies of the brain at work), that support the conclusion that it was humans who created God, not the other way around. And the better we understand the science, the closer we can come to “no heaven … no hell … and no religion too.”
Like our physiological DNA, the psychological mechanisms behind faith evolved over the eons through natural selection. They helped our ancestors work effectively in small groups and survive and reproduce, traits developed long before recorded history, from foundations deep in our mammalian, primate and African hunter-gatherer past.
For example, we are born with a powerful need for attachment, identified as long ago as the 1940s by psychiatrist John Bowlby and expanded on by psychologist Mary Ainsworth. Individual survival was enhanced by protectors, beginning with our mothers. Attachment is reinforced physiologically through brain chemistry, and we evolved and retain neural networks completely dedicated to it. We easily expand that inborn need for protectors to authority figures of any sort, including religious leaders and, more saliently, gods. God becomes a super parent, able to protect us and care for us even when our more corporeal support systems disappear, through death or distance."
Our brains are hard-wired to believe in supernatural gods. The Abrahamic religions all share aspects of god myths from ancient religions and gods, one being the virgin birth, which is an aspect of many ancient gods, suffering, sacrificing, death, and resurrection. Many, many ancient religions all have these aspects of their gods.
I have no problem with people having their beliefs in gods. But I do have a problem with people/societies that impose those beliefs on people who do not share them. That's where all the problems come from: "My god is better and truer than your god!"
The universe was not created by a Man God or Woman God. Period.
He didn't give you His pronouns? He must not be a Progressive. In all His silence, He actually sounds pretty Paleo to me. :)
Shaw, "But i do have a problem with people/societies that impose their beliefson people who do not share them."
As do i.
My favorite saying... as soon as one forgets what they thought they knew they immediately become wise.
Or, simply admitting "i don't know" ,and then to keep on seeking.
What is certain is life is a magical display of phenomenon. It should be appreciated and enjoyed. All of it. It's unfortunate fear and aversion often prevents people from living life to the fullest.
Anyway... time for meditation and post meditation rigpa. :)
Enjoy your phenomenal magical display as the day unfolds.
-FJ the Dangerous and Extreme MAGA Jew said...
He didn't give you His pronouns? He must not be a Progressive. In all His silence, He actually sounds pretty Paleo to me. :)
I don't know what you mean by referring to a "He," and "His," since I have no belief in "He, Him, She, Her, or It." None. So that sentence sounds like "argle bargle" to me.
You can't anthropomorpize G_d, and so you deny humanity itself? You recognize "I", and you clearly accept "you" as you referred me, above. Is it okay for me to refer to myself as the "penis enhanced" and to yourself as the "vaginally disadvantaged"? or are "me" and "your" also to become linguistically disavowed?
If there's no "Big Other" to perform for, what is the proper "authority" for determining right and wrong? Big 'G' Government. Isn't law just a huge collection of meaningless social constructs/ conventions? What makes a Matriarchy better than a Patriarchy then? Your own personally subjective sense of order and decency to the social cancellation of mine? Camus was right, it's all just so Absurd. Which is why I have chosen to "Believe".
Reason and Rationality, Enlightenment, is Deistic. :)
Argle Bargle....??? That's where you've chosen to live.
Hey -FJ!
I'm not going to be drawn into an argument about whether or not there is an incorporeal sky god or isn't. I've learned that it is unproductive to have a discussion with religious believers on whether or not god or gods exist. (Hindus believe in many gods, the Abrahamic religions believe in one god, Buddhists do not believe in any god.) There's no point in discussing any of this.
You are free to believe what you want; I'm not telling you or anyone not to.
And I don't have to justify why I reject a belief in god or gods, or why I've come to that decision.
My non-theistic reasoning is my business, not yours.
PS. Les and I can discuss this matter because we are "on the same page."
He doesn't try to score points, but instead he prefers to discusses his reasoning on this subject as he continues his journey toward enlightenment.
It's friendly, not confrontational.
You are free to believe what you want; I'm not telling you or anyone not to.
No, you just blame and ridicule it. So here's a little "payback"...
No, Buddhists don't believe in anthropomorphic deities. Instead, they believe in desubjectified mental "states" that any drug addict with $5 in his pocket, or Buddhist with 50 years of navel contemplation practice can "achieve". Hey, go for it! Gays, and meditating Buddhist, often enjoy living in their closets. <a href='https://farmersletters.blogspot.com/2022/06/powers-of-belief.html">It gives their otherwise truly "meaningless" lives a little "meaning"</a>.
btw - In case you hadn't heard, the Christian god died, and only returns within "communities of Believers". Clearly, your not one of them. So why do they threaten you so? Can't you "love your neighbor" in all HIS 'otherness'?
...And less deprecates believers in other systems, too. Learn a little 'tolerance'. Anthropomorphizing a "Big Other' is but another way of trying to understand ones-self and others.
In order for life to discover and hold onto "meaning" it requires ritual, religious or otherwise. It's simply creating "order" from "chaos".
Buddhists, ultimately believe in "emergence". Christians typically believe in "transcendance". And therein lies the fundamental difference between the two.
That, and Eastern cultures tend to be endogamous when compared to exogamous Westerners.
:)
FJ pretends to "know" all about Buddhism, Buddhist philosophy, and mental (or more acurately stated mind) states. When in reality he did nothing more than regurgitate "conditioned beliefs" he has chosen to conceptually accept. I have no problem with that. It's his life and his mind. Deluded or otherwise.
People with integrity first experience and become at least somewhat knowledable of the practices of which they speak. I have tried on Christianity, having read the entire Bible cover to cover and practiced their rituals. They fell flat. I have also read parts of the Koran and discussed with Muslims their belifs, i've never practiced Islamn. But my eldest son did for a time. He eventully quit. I've been a practicing Buddhist for 2 1/2 years. It is the ONLY spiritual path that has, and continues to reasonate fully within me. However, i also am interested in Hinduism, ancient Greek and Egyptian spiritual paths and philosophty, Synchronicity, Daoism, Native American spirituality, and more. As well as Quantum Mechanics and physics as they relate to consciousness.
FJ is simply projecting his own behavoirs and beliefs on others. And so Shaw, it's why i place little if any value on what FJ, JC, Thersites, Anonymous, or any other of his sockpuppets have to say on these subjects.
To seek is to grow. To reify is to shrink, shrivel, and die on the vine.. I wish FJ well. That's it.
like forcing children to pray in public schools, athletic events, and other public gatherings. Not everyone believes in god or gods, and our government has no right to force one religion or ANY religion on its citizens. It's unAmerican!
You're just "wrong". Isaiah Berlin, "Letter to George Kennan" (2/13/51)
If pushed to the extreme, this doctrine would, of course, do away with all education, since when we send children to school or influence them in other ways without obtaining their approval for what we are doing, are we not "tampering" with them, "moulding" them like pieces of clay with no purpose of their own? Our answer has to be that certainly all "moulding" is evil, and that if human beings at birth had the power of choice and the means of understanding the world, it would be criminal; since they have not, we temporarily enslave them, for fear that, otherwise, they will suffer worse misfortunes from nature and from men, and this "temporary enslavement" is a necessary evil until such time as they are able to choose for themselves--the "enslavement" having as its purpose not an inculcation of obedience but its contrary, the development of power of free judgement and choice; still, evil it remains, even if necessary.
Continued...
Communists and Fascists maintain that this kind of "education" is needed not only for children but for entire nations for long periods, the slow withering away of the State corresponding to immaturity in the lives of individuals. The analogy is specious because peoples, nations are not individuals and still less children; moreover in promising maturity their practice belies their professions; that is to say, they are lying, and for the most part know that they are. From a necessary evil in the case of the education of helpless children, this kind of practice becomes an evil on a much larger scale, and quite gratuitous, based either on utilitarianism, which misrepresents our moral values, or again on metaphors which misdescribe both what we call good and bad, and the nature of the world, the facts themselves. For we, i.e. those who join with us, are more concerned with making people free than making them happy; we would rather that they chose badly than not at all; because we believe that unless they choose they cannot be either happy or unhappy in any sense in which these conditions are worth having; the very notion of "worth having" presupposes the choice of ends, a system of free preferences; and an undermining of them is what strikes us with such cold terror, worse than the most unjust sufferings, which nevertheless leave the possibility of knowing them for what they are--of free judgement, which makes it possible to condemn them--still open.
There's no difference between teaching children that Jesus loves them than teaching them that they should observe the historically based moral tenets of "Intersectionality".
-FJ: "There's no difference between teaching children that Jesus loves them than teaching them that they should observe the historically based moral tenets of "Intersectionality".
Bullpuckey!
When children are taught that Jesus loves them, they're also taught that he died for THEIR SINS! Mind you, I was 5 years old when I was taught that because of ME and my SINS, Jesus was tortured and killed! My fault that this nice god who loves me was killed! How do you think that affects a 5-year old?
You and others may think that's a lovely thing to teach a 5 year old. I, and millions of other human beings, do not. We reject it.
Intersectionality does not teach children that human sacrifice is necessary to forgive children for sinning against gods.
Maybe you just don't like the philosophy of intersectionality? Here's a suggestion. Ignore it.
Live in your own supercilious world and leave others to make their own decisions.
Les "FJ is simply projecting his own behavoirs and beliefs on others."
He can't help himself.
He reminds me of the title of Yuval Noah Harari's book, "Unstoppable Us, How Humans Took Over The World."
How -FJ is unstoppable and takes over a blog's comment section with his vainglorious posts.
And intersectionality teaches that I and my ancestors enslaved black people and tortured them horribly. I and my ancestros then discriminated against them for another 150 years and prevented their freedom. They teach that I am guilty of these crimes becuase my ancestors did this (although my ancestors ACTUALLY fought to free them), and therefore I must be quiet and NOT criticize blacks when they riot, or misbehave and kill each other cuz they only do that because I and my ancestors have "oppressed them", that I owe them a debt for crimes (aka "sins") I never committed and are pure, unadulterated LIES. As you say, I should "ignore it."
Like I said, "no difference."
"Live in your own supercilious world and leave others to make their own decisions." Ditto.
This is what my ancestor did before mustering our about a month before the unit was, as he was recovering from illness.
60th Regiment Infantry Reorganized. Organized at Cleveland and Columbus, Ohio, February to April, 1864. Left State for Alexandria, Va., April 21, 1864. Attached to 2nd Brigade, 3rd Division, 9th Army Corps, Army of the Potomac, to September, 1864. 2nd Brigade, 1st Division, 9th Army Corps, to July, 1865.
SERVICE.--Campaign from the Rapidan to the James River, Va., May 3-June 15, 1864. Battles of the Wilderness May 5-7. Spottsylvania May 8-12. Ny River May 10. Spottsylvania Court House May 12-21. Assault on the Salient May 12. North Anna River May 23-26. Ox Ford May 23-24. On line of the Pamunkey May 26-28. Totopotomoy May 28-31. Cold Harbor June 1-12. Bethesda Church June 1-3. Before Petersburg June 16-18. Siege of Petersburg June 16, 1864, to April 2, 1865. Mine Explosion July 30, 1864. Six-Mile House, Weldon Railroad, August 18-21. Poplar Springs Church September 29-October 2. Reconnoissance on Vaughan and Squirrel Level Road October 8. Boydton Plank Road, Hatcher's Run, October 27-28. (Co. "K" organized November and December. 1864); 9th and 10th Independent Companies Sharpshooters as Companies "G" and "H," February 25, 1865.) Fort Stedman March 25, 1865. Appomattox Campaign March 28-April 9. Assault on and fall of Petersburg April 2. Occupation of Petersburg April 3. Pursuit of Lee April 3-9. Surrender of Lee and his army at Appomattox Court House April 9. Moved to Alexandria, Va., April 21-28. Duty there and at Washington, D.C., till July. Grand Review at Washington May 23. Mustered out July 28, 1865. Regiment lost during service 3 Officers and 110 Enlisted men killed and mortally wounded and 130 Enlisted men by disease. Total 243.
Vainglorious? You bet! Intersectionality is based upon pure unmitigated LIES!
Yes. Ignore it.
PS. Learn to meditate.
And understand everyone's not out to get you.
Shaw, i find FJ hilarious actually. And his "points" get me laughing when i'm a bit down.
Anyone that believes they know it all like FJ apparently does, will, at some point in their life, reap the results of that illusion. I speak from personal experiential knowledge. And from that i actually hope FJ finds peace within himself and does not go through what i have.
Namaste FJ.
And understand everyone's not out to get you.
...but everyone is out to acquire "power". It's why I don't take it personally, but continue to confront your and their lies. :)
-FJ wrote: "...but everyone is out to acquire "power". It's why I don't take it personally, but continue to confront your and their lies."
First part of your comment is nothing more than paranoid thinking. And wrong.
Second part, where you say you "don't take it personally," is not true. You take everything personally. Look at the number of comments you've posted here (actually, I've LET you post here). Only someone with an axe to grind* does that.
*axe to grind" is an idiomatic expression that means to have a personal or selfish reason for doing something. It is usually used when someone is motivated by a grudge or a personal agenda, rather than by the best interests of others. The metaphor is that someone who has an axe to grind is using a situation to pursue their own interests.
Third, you called me a liar, ("...continue to confront your and their lies.")
and gave no evidence for that slur. What I write on my blog are my OPINIONS.
What you've written is paranoia of the worst kind and evocative of the paranoid style in politics: "Heated exaggeration, suspiciousness, and conspiratorial fantasy."
No one asked you to confront lies and be the defender of truth on internet blogs. Most people would say that's rather pompous. Who made you the prime detector of lies, anyway?
PS. Mind your manners. You came to my blog and called me a liar. While you accuse everyone of seeking power, you mean to grab onto it by labeling those you don't know or understand as "liars," thereby making YOU the only all-powerful truth teller.
Not everyone's out to get you, even if that paranoid thought drives you to visit blogs, insult the bloggers, and put on the mask of Diogenes.
Ever look in the mirror FJ? Maybe you don't have one? Sure seems like it.
Second, your opinions speak for themselves. Paranoia would be defined as someone who is delusional about people being "out to get them". You're NOT out to defeat MAGA and Trump? It's all in my imagination? All "reactions" to your stated opinions are paranoia?
ps - I've also concluded that in the long run, it's unhealthy to advocate for moral hazards in the name of "liberty", as much as to live as neighbors amongst such who would create them. And that is my sole motivation for continuing to post here.
And who said I was a truth "teller"? I admit that I am a truth "seeker", but whatever gave you the impression that I thought I was in possession of it? I may speak "authoritatively" using "authoritative sources" from the past, but I am in possession of few, if any, truths, only in a belief in the Lindy Effect and in Pascal's Pensee #325:
325 -Montaigne is wrong. Custom should be followed only because it is custom, and not because it is reasonable or just. But people follow it for this sole reason, that they think it just. Otherwise they would follow it no longer, although it were the custom; for they will only submit to reason or justice. Custom without this would pass for tyranny; but the sovereignty of reason and justice is no more tyrannical than that of desire. They are principles natural to man.
It would therefore be right to obey laws and customs, because they are laws; but we should know that there is neither truth nor justice to introduce into them, that we know nothing of these, and so must follow what is accepted. By this means we would never depart from them. But people cannot accept this doctrine; and, as they believe that truth can be found, and that it exists in law and custom, they believe them, and take their antiquity as a proof of their truth, and not simply of their authority apart from truth. Thus they obey laws, but they are liable to revolt when these are proved to be valueless; and this can be shown of all, looked at from a certain aspect.
FJ, you're so full if caca i can smell it from here.
Post a Comment