Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length

Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - BillHopkins

1 [2] 3 ... 18
16
Interzone / Re: Non-metal
« on: May 06, 2013, 02:44:24 AM »
Agree. My favourite would be Piper at the Gates of Dawn which unlike their later stuff is pop stuctured with a subconscious profundity rather than 'profound' music that is just pop at heart.

And speaking of the Tangerine Dream influence, witness this quirky gem:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sK_TnlFNnCM

Great! Piper is certianly arresting.
Are you suggesting
that it is more profound than their more famous offerings?

TD has certainly came along way, and that's for sure.
In amongst the drones
The 'singer' in this clip looks as though high as a motherfucker.
Though I did hear a flicker or two of set the controls.

17
Interzone / Re: Non-metal
« on: May 03, 2013, 03:52:10 PM »
Pink Floyd: English Psychedelia (early)/Space Rock(mid)/Prog(mid-later)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kmcBdXhYDvQ
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bfk8F5X5p_0

The pioneers of space music. Their early, wandering period flirting with mysticism in between loosing their first front man and achieving world-wide fame with darkside of the moon is in some respects their most interesting. Tangerine Dream, Kraftwerk and the rest of the rest of the 'krautrock' movement would not have existed.

19
Metal / King Crimson
« on: May 03, 2013, 03:42:38 PM »
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nlNantlznCA

A special time in alternative popular music

20
Interzone / Re: Non-metal
« on: May 03, 2013, 03:40:49 PM »
Van Der Graaf Generator: English Prog

This is perhaps a fleeting example of what we were told would be the permanent outcome of liberation and democratisation of culture: High art being embraced by the masses. A composer in every rehearsal studio, musicians exploring themes of humanity and existence on every radio station. Encorporation of high culture into modern forms. A genius on every street corner.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G0mVOcdafRw

Instead we have tripe.

21
Interzone / Re: Non-metal
« on: May 03, 2013, 03:34:16 PM »
Premiata Forneria Marconi: Italian Prog:

The flow, and smooth thematic transition of old-school prog compared to modern prog stands out.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7oekZP4wr2Y

22
Interzone / Non-metal
« on: May 03, 2013, 03:23:11 PM »
Emerson, Lake & Palmer: English Prog

Intense! Even a blast beat or two  ;)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4-kV1AB5zE4

23
Interzone / Re: Liberalism causes terrorism
« on: May 03, 2013, 03:16:11 AM »
Anyway, the way things are going, we will get to witness, in real time, what happens to a society that replaces God, nation, family, and tribe with competitive Global Economy.

This is the idea that environmentalism constitutes a contradiction to LDC.

You might be right, but I don't think nations are going to revert back to traditional structures. Not if the environmental 'correction' isn't violent enough that we loose the scientific method and understanding. As long as this remains the process of industrialisation, and the associated underlying forms of social association, will start again.

I realise I'm sound overly fatalistic and deterministic in my posts on this topic, but i'm just keen to stress the point that culture is bound up with larger forces in society, and to share what i've been thinking about lately. If this involves me going too far to make the point then that is unfortunate but it's still a worthwhile topic to discuss, especially in light of this thread which seems to suggest that liberalism is so bound up with internal contradictions that it is causing terrorists to appear left right and centre, which is nonsense.

24
Interzone / Re: Liberalism causes terrorism
« on: May 03, 2013, 03:04:49 AM »
You're an idiot if you think this. I'm not advocating any political system. I'm simply stating what anyone who looks at the facts can see for christ's sake! The direction of history in the last century and particularly in the last 50 years has been aggressively towards liberal democracy. Calling this 'leftist' is like calling a friend who is watching a football game a defector because they observe that the other team is clearly winning.

True enough, but liberal democratic capitalism still isn't sustainable, particularly economically but demographically as well. LDC is best fit for the Anglo Saxon type from which it originated. Deviate a bit from this lineage and people start looking back to when they had a better fit for themselves:

LDC isn't sustainable economically and demographically, compared to what exactly? Compared to communism? Former communist countries collapsed in scores in the 20th century and reverted/converted to LDC! Compared to autocraticies and military dictatorships? These also fell in scores across the middle east and south america in the 20th century, to be replaced with, you guessed it LDC. Compared to traditionalism? I don't even know any societies still characterised by traditional structures... perhaps some islamist nations? Islam probably represents the only challenge to LDC on a world scale, but even islamic societies are modernising slowly.

The point is, I don't see any LDC nations slipping to communism or traditionalism, or making any other MAJOR reivisions to their paradigms. Major revisions have happened in the other direction for the whole of the 20th century, however.

25
Interzone / Re: Liberalism causes terrorism
« on: May 03, 2013, 02:43:36 AM »
Quote
What, so you think that, before liberalism, when people had an 'organic' or 'homogeneous' society... everything was hunky dory? Do you think that because everyone merely shared a religion and history, that there would have been no political differences: that groups were not persecuted, that class structures didn't exist, and that people would not have wanted to separate politically if they had the freedom, wealth and education? Have you ever read a history book?
Do I think the past was an idyllic perfect utopia? No.
Was it better than what we have now? Yes.

I prefer a society that understands that history, race, and religion are all intertwined. That cultivates a heroic spirit and doesn't feel guilty for being militarily strong. That understands that not all people are equal and that men and women aren't the same.  What do you prefer?

Also, I wonder why you think class structures and persecuting unwanted groups are a negative. Seems like you want to have an egalitarian non-judgmental society...

Quote
I just don't see this "implosion" when I walk down the street or visit the city.
Reading your posts, I'm not surprised.

You might prefer this type of society, but it's just not going to happen unless you roll back the last 400 years of scientific and economic developments, which have replaced traditional forms of association with rational forms. If you want traditional society you have to roll back post-industrialism, industrialism and this leads to you having to roll back science. None of this is likely to happen, not merely because human nature dictates that people value the spoils of post-industrialism and industrialism more than they value non-tangible goods, but also because a nation that did this would feel open to domination from more technologically and economically advanced countries.

A culture bound by racial association is not economically efficient. You can't move skills and labour accross boarders. A culture in which people live agrarian lives in rural areas is not economically efficient. You need workers living in cities and massing around centres of production. A culture bound by tribal allegiances is not economically efficient compared with a culture of atomistic individuals who can be shifted around to suit the needs of the market. NONE OF THIS IS ADVOCATING ANYTHING. It's just sociological observation. And people want economic efficiency!

The things people have gained from changes to society enabled by the scientific and industrial revolutions (see my first post) (which as a by-product, changed the TYPES of association within our culture: from family and tribal associations to beaurocratic, atomistic and 'rational') outweigh what has been lost, in some important statistical sense at the population level. Think of it as a process of cultural selection.   

If this wasn't the case then history would be going in... the other direction

27
Interzone / Re: Liberalism causes terrorism
« on: April 24, 2013, 03:19:53 AM »
That book seems to have been written by a pro-democracy cheerleader who came to realize one part of Plato's theory on govt's. (Not disagreeing with you, Bill)

Liberal democracy is definitely not the end, though. However, knowing Plato's theory....I'm not anxious to see the next part.

He's pretty much a classical liberal I think, with Neo-conservative leanings. However he has opposed the militarism and international-interventionist stance of recent US foreign policy, which sets him apart from Neo-conservative philosophy. Marxists hate him because he implies there is a dialectic to history, but that this dialectic is ending with liberalism and not communism, which is the opposite of what marx argued using the same or similar method (dialectic of history). This doesn't matter, what matters is whether his theories are correct. And they ride on the shoulders of such influential thinkers as Hegel, Kojeve, Marx, Weber (with a little Nietzsche in there on 'the last man'). More importantly, his ideas are persuasive from an historical-empirical point of view (despite advocating an all-encompassing 'philosophy of history', i.e. an account of history as being driven by a few essential factors - which is, technically speaking, not 'empirical history' which rejects essentialist thinking and grand narratives. But at least it's not post-modern history, which rejects any attempt to come to a greater understanding of historical processes as merely an imperialistic imposition of your own values and culturally-relative 'rationality' into realms where they don't/can't/shouldn't apply).

His ideas have nothing much in common with Plato's on the cycle of political systems, from what I've read.

This is a lot of good brainfood, despite what others may say.

Thanks, by the way.

28
Interzone / Re: Liberalism causes terrorism
« on: April 24, 2013, 02:34:41 AM »
There are undoubtedly appealing aspects to leftism.
But knowing the damage it does, and where it must ultimately lead, integrity demands saying no to it.

And i'm trying to say that merely saying 'no' to it might not do anything if liberalism is the mere superstructure to a more fundamental economic base. See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_End_of_History_and_the_Last_Man

29
Interzone / Re: Liberalism causes terrorism
« on: April 24, 2013, 12:19:24 AM »
Threads like this sure uncover the closet leftists.

You're an idiot if you think this. I'm not advocating any political system. I'm simply stating what anyone who looks at the facts can see for christ's sake! The direction of history in the last century and particularly in the last 50 years has been aggressively towards liberal democracy. Calling this 'leftist' is like calling a friend who is watching a football game a defector because they observe that the other team is clearly winning.

30
Interzone / Re: Liberalism causes terrorism
« on: April 24, 2013, 12:11:30 AM »
Quote
it is meeting people's needs to a degree unprecedented by any other cultural-economic system in human history.

If by "needs" you mean only food, water, and shelter, then yes those are easier to get than ever, but beyond that...?

Liberalism has no culture, it simply mashes pre-existing cultures together into a grey paste. Ever since liberalism has become the establishment, society has been on a spiral of implosion. There is far, far less social consensus now than there ever has been. That list of values you posted is heartily disagreed with by a large number of people in this country. Where do they go to avoid them?

What, so you think that, before liberalism, when people had an 'organic' or 'homogeneous' society... everything was hunky dory? Do you think that because everyone merely shared a religion and history, that there would have been no political differences: that groups were not persecuted, that class structures didn't exist, and that people would not have wanted to separate politically if they had the freedom, wealth and education? Have you ever read a history book?

I just don't see this "implosion" when I walk down the street or visit the city. I think it's masking your own values in 'The True' and 'The Good'. The direction of history is towards liberalism, and NON-LIBERAL cultures are collapsing, not the other way around! I'm not celebrating this, but you have to see the historical process for what it simply is!

The last century has seen dozens and dozens of communist countries fall. It has seen the rise and fall of fascism and national socialism. And it has seen the collapse of military dictatorships. All of these have been replaced with.... you guessed it: liberal democracy. This is just cursory fact. Liberal democracy brings with it certain discordant elements, and causes the odd shooting or bombing, but countries are flocking to it.

1 [2] 3 ... 18