US man killed by endangered tribe in india

1234568»

Comments

  • pinno
    pinno Posts: 51,196
    Robert88 wrote:
    One of the consequences of Empire was the infamous Sykes Picot agreement whereby we(and the French) secretly created the modern Middle East back in 1916.

    Over a hundred years later it is still causing war and bloodshed, including the creation and rise of ISIS.

    This is true, to an extent. They have had years to redraw lines along ethnic groups but the whole of the middle east is littered with so many different ethnic groups.
    There seems to be devolution on so many levels in the middle east. It's a far cry from when Baghdad was the centre of the Islamic (Abbasids) world, boasting a University of Wisdom including the Arts (the first recorded University containing an arts faculty) and eventually sacked by the Mongols in 1258 when it was starting to disintegrate.
    So, Iran and Iraq have had nearly 800 years to recover, certain historians say that it never has.
    It is therefore difficult to blame the current bloodshed entirely on the Sykes Picot agreement.

    I would say that the problems in Iraq and Iran have a lot to do with the Iran/Iraq war where the West (particularly the US) supported Iraq in this conflict and then went full circle because S Hussein decided not to sing from the same hymn sheet. They were used as pawns in the cold war. Same as Afghanistan.
    It's little wonder they mistrust the West.
    seanoconn - gruagach craic!
  • bompington
    bompington Posts: 7,674
    bompington wrote:

    He is rather awful. Rather struggle to take anything he says seriously other than as an apologist for the fairly extreme right wing.
    You are aware that he's actually a Marxist? And thanks for illustrating one of the biggest problems in political discourse these days - refusing to take someone seriously as a convenient excuse for not trying to take on their arguments. Or ad hom, for short; the flipside, of course, of argument from authority, as in "I'm an expert and you're not"
  • bompington
    bompington Posts: 7,674
    Afterall what do you really need? IMHO food, water, shelter and company of those in your circle (friends, family, etc) pretty much fulfills the essential requirements.
    I can think of a few other things

    imortalityL.gif
  • rick_chasey
    rick_chasey Posts: 72,244
    bompington wrote:
    bompington wrote:

    He is rather awful. Rather struggle to take anything he says seriously other than as an apologist for the fairly extreme right wing.
    You are aware that he's actually a Marxist? And thanks for illustrating one of the biggest problems in political discourse these days - refusing to take someone seriously as a convenient excuse for not trying to take on their arguments. Or ad hom, for short; the flipside, of course, of argument from authority, as in "I'm an expert and you're not"

    Sure, but in fairness, I have tried to explain stuff but a lot of it requires a lot of explaining which is better understood through reading and this is a bike forum so I cut myself some slack with some short hand.

    This guy is an opinion coloumnist who regularly spouts comtradictory and ill informed columns. He’s discredited himself enough times for me to be comfortable not to respond to him.

    I mean, had you come up with Nial Ferguson and his apology for colonialism we’d have a debate, but this moron? Come on.

    We don’t all have time to argue every piece of dross that’s spat out.

    FWIW, I tend to judge him on his opinions and not the communist company he keeps; his are very aligned with the current hard right. Politics is a horseshoe after all.
  • morstar
    morstar Posts: 6,190
    bompington wrote:
    Afterall what do you really need? IMHO food, water, shelter and company of those in your circle (friends, family, etc) pretty much fulfills the essential requirements.
    I can think of a few other things

    imortalityL.gif

    And yet huge parts of the world that are open to modernisation have no clean water. Conversely, many desert cities boast amazing water features. Being open to the modern world does not ensure you will reap the benefits it has to offer.

    Exposing a primitive people to the modern world seems unlikely to provide them many tangible benefits unless they somehow take ownership of some beneficial trade or natural resource opportunities.
  • pinno
    pinno Posts: 51,196
    morstar wrote:
    Exposing a primitive people to the modern world seems unlikely to provide them many tangible benefits unless they somehow take ownership of some beneficial trade or natural resource opportunities.

    Precisely.

    Infant mortality is directly linked to malnutrition. If this isolated tribe live free of the environmental physical and emotional stresses of modern life and providing they are in homoeostasis, what benefit is to be gained from modernity?

    Surely the measure of 'civilisation' should be a living peacefully harmoniously within sustainable demands on the resources required to survive.
    Global capitalism is highly dependent on finite resources and for all it's perceived benefits, it is coupled directly with a massive unbalance of wealth distribution.
    seanoconn - gruagach craic!
  • pblakeney
    pblakeney Posts: 25,596
    Pinno wrote:
    morstar wrote:
    Exposing a primitive people to the modern world seems unlikely to provide them many tangible benefits unless they somehow take ownership of some beneficial trade or natural resource opportunities.

    Precisely.

    Infant mortality is directly linked to malnutrition. If this isolated tribe live free of the environmental physical and emotional stresses of modern life and providing they are in homoeostasis, what benefit is to be gained from modernity?

    Surely the measure of 'civilisation' should be a living peacefully harmoniously within sustainable demands on the resources required to survive.
    Global capitalism is highly dependent on finite resources and for all it's perceived benefits, it is coupled directly with a massive unbalance of wealth distribution.
    Now that is the "unfortunate truth".
    The above may be fact, or fiction, I may be serious, I may be jesting.
    I am not sure. You have no chance.
    Veronese68 wrote:
    PB is the most sensible person on here.
  • robert88
    robert88 Posts: 2,696
    PBlakeney wrote:
    Pinno wrote:
    morstar wrote:
    Exposing a primitive people to the modern world seems unlikely to provide them many tangible benefits unless they somehow take ownership of some beneficial trade or natural resource opportunities.

    Precisely.

    Infant mortality is directly linked to malnutrition. If this isolated tribe live free of the environmental physical and emotional stresses of modern life and providing they are in homoeostasis, what benefit is to be gained from modernity?

    Surely the measure of 'civilisation' should be a living peacefully harmoniously within sustainable demands on the resources required to survive.
    Global capitalism is highly dependent on finite resources and for all it's perceived benefits, it is coupled directly with a massive unbalance of wealth distribution.
    Now that is the "unfortunate truth".

    Clearly this is the way we should be heading after a "No-deal Brexit".

    It'll be tough for a generation or two but we will adapt. And really it was a Golden Age:

    agriculture_england2.jpg?itok=vvOE--CJ

    2016-10-08_11-40-26.jpg
  • morstar
    morstar Posts: 6,190
    There is a significant difference between not having progressed and opting to regress.

    If we did a cost benefits analysis of integrating tribes into the modern world, in many cases the benefits of modernisation would be marginal at best. There are many really poor potential outcomes.
  • robert88
    robert88 Posts: 2,696
    morstar wrote:
    There is a significant difference between not having progressed and opting to regress.

    If we did a cost benefits analysis of integrating tribes into the modern world, in many cases the benefits of modernisation would be marginal at best. There are many really poor potential outcomes.

    Well that's Sunderland stuffed then.
  • DeVlaeminck
    DeVlaeminck Posts: 8,719
    morstar wrote:
    There is a significant difference between not having progressed and opting to regress.

    So you see a return to subsistence farming as regressing ?
    [Castle Donington Ladies FC - going up in '22]
  • pinno
    pinno Posts: 51,196
    Robert88 wrote:
    morstar wrote:
    There is a significant difference between not having progressed and opting to regress.

    If we did a cost benefits analysis of integrating tribes into the modern world, in many cases the benefits of modernisation would be marginal at best. There are many really poor potential outcomes.

    Well that's Sunderland stuffed then.

    I could think of a long list of places...
    seanoconn - gruagach craic!
  • pblakeney
    pblakeney Posts: 25,596
    Bit ironic that the tribe was endangered though?
    The above may be fact, or fiction, I may be serious, I may be jesting.
    I am not sure. You have no chance.
    Veronese68 wrote:
    PB is the most sensible person on here.
  • morstar
    morstar Posts: 6,190
    morstar wrote:
    There is a significant difference between not having progressed and opting to regress.

    So you see a return to subsistence farming as regressing ?

    No, what in my posting on this thread prompts that question?

    Conversely, I wouldn't look at any moment in time through rose tinted spectacles. Modern life brings many good things and a whole heap of bad. I do find it amazing that with all the wealth and technology at our disposal we can't provide clean water for the whole world.
  • john80
    john80 Posts: 2,965
    morstar wrote:
    morstar wrote:
    There is a significant difference between not having progressed and opting to regress.

    So you see a return to subsistence farming as regressing ?

    No, what in my posting on this thread prompts that question?

    Conversely, I wouldn't look at any moment in time through rose tinted spectacles. Modern life brings many good things and a whole heap of bad. I do find it amazing that with all the wealth and technology at our disposal we can't provide clean water for the whole world.

    I would hazard a guess in that there is no money in it. It is more cost effective to sell drugs to combat the many effects of dirty water and watch a load of people die. However I would point out that in many of the effected countries if you started with the aim of providing free water as a individual with unlimited wealth the quantity of bribes required to the local officials may make you think of not bothering.
  • Wasn't there a case of a pharma company boss admitting they spend more on research aimed at drugs for treating symptoms that curing conditions? Or was it worse than that that they suppressed a drug that cured a condition because their own drugs that treated the symptoms was more profitable in the long term?
  • BTW it turns out this missionary trained with a missionary training organisation before going out there. But they didn't help him with his mission because that was his personal mission he had been working towards since he was 18 years old.

    No they didn't help him. Training him up on how to understand languages, to appreciate the effects of culture and best practises in achieving religious conversion did offer him no support or encouragement for his actions. I really can't see how they helped him break Indian laws on Sentinilese isolation.