Volpe

Does that pre-date the (ancient) greeks? Plato and Aristotle had a lot to say about 'freedom'. When I say 'Western' I mean them, given our whole way of thinking (philosophy) and problem solving (scientific method) was defined by them.

From my brief look, Hinduism and the Ancient greeks started talking about Freedom (and freedom of speech) at around the same time (~400BCE).

A number of buddhist sects/schools hold no belief in any god... It is a religion, they are not irrational. It is a major religion.

> And as for educated. Perhaps there isn't a conclusive study on the subject, but it is safe to say that the more educated you are, the less likely you are to be religious, particularly fundamental. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religiosity_and_intelligence

Correlation or causation? I don't really have time to read through all the studies, but St Thomas Aquinas is a good counter example of that premise, very analytical, very religious...

Agree!

Admittedly if you don't understand the physical limitations of wireless, it's the obvious conclusion one makes (everything seems to be going wireless, and LTE is FAST!). There is a chance we innovate in this area and work out how to make infinitely scalable wireless... But maybe I'm just being overly optimistic.

> "Freedom of Expression" is not an American/French/Western concept. Shouldn't it be a natural human right?

It is a distinctly "western" thought[1] (as is "Human Rights"[2]). I actually didn't know whether it had been imported into India, given india's rather "mixed" (east/west) history.

The concept of 'natural human rights' is also a western concept, so no, I don't think we should continue to talk like our (western) way of thinking is the 'right' way, and everyone else is 'wrong'.

[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_of_speech#Origins

[2] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_rights#Philosophy

That's right because all religious people are poorly educated war loving and irrational.

Seriously... Do you forget what was responsible for spreading education so rapidly around the world (give you a hint, it wasn't atheists).

There are a number of religions that are founded in rationality, and large components of others that are pure rationality. Just because you don't believe in (a) G/god doesn't mean you aren't religious. Just because you believe in a G/god doesn't mean you are irrational.

As fun as it is to think everyone thinks like americans... Does India have and promote the ideal of "Freedom of Expression"? Or is this just the US peanut gallery giving their 2 cents on other peoples' culture?

Countries that have a copyright collection agency (Like Australia). Needn't worry about these things, and can include full transcripts of copyrighted material in education material.

America's "Fair Use" (defence) is not the only model in which copyright is managed and upheld.

> In China far more people die from eating food laced with toxins than do in countries with food inspectors.

Citation please...

Collective Rights:

- http://library.thinkquest.org/C0126065/isscollective.html

- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socialism

You'll see the the above is not incompatible with Human Rights[1]

As per my original comment, democracy and the spread of it at the hand of the US is entrenched in its history[2] and serves its religious and economical agenda.

You may want to look up the following for your own benefit (in future discussions):

- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_fallacies

In particular:

- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem

- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man

[1] http://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universal_Declaration_of_Hu...

[2] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Empire_of_Liberty

> They are more interested in conveying the truth than being factual.

That is an interesting statement, I don't think I understand what you mean? Isn't conveying the truth being factual? Or is this an expression I am not familiar with?

Hmm, a dishonest response, that ignores what I said. There is little point in this discussion continuing.

Collective Rights is a popular concept that a quick google would reveal to you. It is not about Clans, Communism or Relgion.

Democracy is not a cure to oppression.

I didn't say MBP, I said Mac Pro (as in their Tower product).

I didn't mean, what will apple think of fan boys or haters. I was questioning the consistency of view of the fan boys, of course its rather moot, as fan boys are of course not consistent at the level of discussion, but instead company.

Apple don't release things that make them tons of money, they market things that make them tons of money. It was pretty clear the iPod (1st generation) was not a fantastic product, but Apple marketed the crap out of it, to the point it would seem like the only option to some people.

> Democracy is, more or less, the only way to get human rights for citizens (a little simplified, but not by much).

I'll just correct your line a little, it is one of the most efficient ways to get individual rights.

> So you're saying that rule of law, women's right, etc (see e.g. the UN declarations) are just Western propaganda -- other people don't want it?

No, I wasn't saying that, those were your words. The UN declaration of human rights, is not incompatible with the notion of collective rights. That is, you don't need to have individual rights, to still provide human rights.

> Afaik, everyone and their dogs try to emigrate to where they can get these rights and the good economy that comes in an open, democratic society... (and/or bleed in the streets for them.)

This is simply untrue, who is 'everyone'? The majority of the world's population don't live in the west, and aren't trying to migrate to it.

Those that do migrate, are motivated by security and economy. Though these things can be related to democracy, the motivation is not related.

> Thanks for a good laugh. I'll still assume you're a troll or from the 50 cent army.

Unnecessary to degrade the discussion like that. I am merely providing an alternate point of view. I know that can be confronting, but it's the point of view that is confronting, not the person providing it.

That ignore's a whole lot of culture. Democracy is part of western culture. It is a biproduct of individualism, and individual rights... These are not universally agreed concepts and a lot of people don't agree with them.

Essentially the "Democracy is a universal good" is just US propaganda that furthers its own interests.

Apple still make Mac Pros... a very niche product... there are probably more people into projector phones than mac pros.

I'll be curious if all the Apple fan boy's retract what they say when the iPhone gets a projector added to it. I suspect they'll argue the: "The market it ready for it now!" line :P

Well you raise Tiananmen, which is impossible to prove either way. But it is well known that people died amoung chinese (hence the massive emigration during and right after).

And now you've raised messing with Hukou, I hadn't heard of that happening, and again, you still haven't provided any sources for your info. I imagine it is extremely hard to mess with Hukou as you'd have to change birth records as well, Given china doesn't have a centralised system (for either birth or Hukou) records, it would be very complicated to achieve this.

There is a conservative wing and a progressive wing to the CCP... much like there is a Republican party and a democratic party. one party state is techniquely true, but in reality it plays out much like a 2 party system.

Government is oligarchical by nature. i would not rank the US much better than china in that regard.

Great little rant, but provide some citation please. Which reporters are currently in re-education camps, and It's unheard of that an entire family is sent for re-education (unless the entire family committed a crime together), which makes me doubt most of what you've said.

Also which event are your referring to with the 70 (actually 7000) deaths?

It's funny you are railing against propaganda by writing propaganda, please inform your points with actual data.

Government doesn't want X to be said about it, and thus pressures/censors company Y to stop it.

(X = "Anti-Communist sentiment" or "War crimes") (Y = "Google" or "Visa, Mastercard, Amazon, Wikileaks... etc")

Not a huge noticeable difference.

The point I was trying to make, is everyone is quick to taint a discussion on china with words like "Dictatorship", when in fact, china isn't (You know they can vote!?), and all the 'evidence' of them being one are scenarios played out in all countries.

... So they knew, because they already knew. So really they just confirmed.

Ask that person to go and find my details, and they will surely fail. Because they know nothing about me, and the transaction history doesn't tell them anything... thus it is not 'identifying'.

A glimpse of what? That money buys power, and the "shining light" of democracy is just a plutocracy much like their own system... That IS brutal, but not in the way you think.

If that is your qualification for a dictatorship, then the U.S falls in that category as well. See WikiLeaks, and Assange.

That still isn't your identity. You can identify yourself by it, but no one else can. Unless they already know that information about you... it which case, they already knew...

Not really, because it could just set a metric on how cheap debt is before it purchases (i.e the 30:1 return they mentioned).

In the end creditors want to get rid of risk, so if someone isn't paying the loan, getting 1/30th of that money is better than 0.

I don't see how this could create a competitive (and thus drive prices up) situation.

If your identity isn't attached... it isn't your history. It's just 'a' history.

There isn't any mention of taxes in that article... What am I missing?

While I agree with your points, I also think there are problems that should be resolved.

- Historically, the majority of presidents have been rich and white. How do you fix that?

- Candidates make heavy use of propaganda, there is no accountability to what is said. Is censoring information (i.e What China's PRC does) any different from glutting all forms of media with YOUR information so other information is harder to find? This (among other things) was how Berlusconi came to power, and stayed there in Italy.

- Industry getting involved in matters of state... is this any different from Church and state? Should the same 'fix' be applied?

No, you provided a qualification of why they weren't... I gave you an example of a mathematician who broke your qualification, and logically should fall into your definition of a 'quack'.

The idea being, that you'd have to back pedal, and change your qualification. Which I could then use to apply to other fields, that you deem as 'quackery', and thus undo the foundation of your argument.

Instead, you just denied the reality of what you said... I didn't count on that. Well done.

Better let Andrew Wiles know his 8 years spent on Fermat's Last Theorem was just a bullshit waste of time, because he couldn't use it to run a hedge fund, or software company...

It can only be 'proved' in the 'contrived' world of pure mathematics... what bullshit!

It's pretty rude to post religious gumph as though it's fact too... I'd argue the response was reasonable.