 |
| Arab royalty looms behind and beside the Queen of England |
Whoa! We hear about how the Queen of England honours people with the OBE and the Knighthood and other goodies. She is by far the most visible and prominent royal in the world; the British monarchy is.
Therefore, we were (sic) quite amused to read this news from Abu Dhabi:
Shaikh Khalifa conferred on Queen Elizabeth the Order of Zayed, the United Arab Emirates’ highest civil decoration. He also bestowed the Order of Federation to both Prince Andrew, Duke of York, and Prince Philip, Duke of Edinburgh.
It must be noted that the grand monarch of Great Britain got a civilian award. And no one is arching eyebrows?
Dubai is latest playground of the illuminati and, as any conspiracy researcher worth his salt will tell you, House of Windsor, represented by Queen Elizabeth is a major illuminati family. So no surprise that she was conferred UAE's highest civilian award.
ReplyDeleteBuy why am I telling you all of this? You don't believe in illuminati conspiracy theories, do you? But just to pique your interest, here's a video that will make you think along these lines.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aGeZl-zZmMc
illuminati symbolism in Dubai
I'd say "Beamerville" (as in BMW) is more apropos - did hardly see any camels, except out in the desert kept as tourist attraction. Does the Order come with a stipend?
ReplyDeleteFV, But, but, but, the Royals are all going common...except for the Saudi Royals who seem to have nice fat bank balance unlike the Queen. If the saudis want to pretend they are empowering women, they should be changing their rules and their behaviour to do so instead of photo ops of presenting Hilal-e-jhurrat or whatever it is the Saudi foisted on the QoE.
ReplyDeleteWhat really gets me is that everyone thinks such eyewash from the Saudis is actually an indicator of huge social change in Saudi Arabia? Uh what? This Saudi is the equivalent of a guy stuffing a sock or two in his pants to impress the competition and the targets.
Anon 1 (assuming the second comment is not yours):
ReplyDeleteWhat I said was a bit simple. The operative word/disputed idea was 'civilian' award...it was simply a smirky thought.
Buy why am I telling you all of this? You don't believe in illuminati conspiracy theories, do you?
If that is a swipe, then it is tender and sharp. I like.
Thanks for the link...it is so my territory, literally and otherwise.
Anon 2?
'Camel Town' was meant as sarcasm and to posit against 'queen'. Not too sure how 'Beamerville' fits in, unless all cars look like BMWs...but then all camesl do look like camels.
Don;t know if the Order comes with a stipend or strings attached. Am not good with keeping count or accounts (of the financial kind, of course).
"FV, But, but, but, the Royals are all going common...except for the Saudi Royals who seem to have nice fat bank balance unlike the Queen"
ReplyDeleteErr..forgot to put my name on that post.
Al
Correction: This sentence should read like this:
ReplyDeleteThis Saudi behaviour of honouring Elite women with Awards and pretending a level gender playing field is the equivalent of a teenage kid stuffing a sock or two in his pants to impress the competition and the targets.
Al
Thanks, Al, for clarifying the third anon is you...I thought there was some conspiracy!
ReplyDeleteTo answer, this is not the Saudis. UAE is different in many, many ways...the Queen is rich, please. Sure, S. Arabia and the GCC countries should change their laws, as should many nations.
How can this be an eyewash when the Queen decided to visit and also honour her hosts? She could have refused to go.
"Sure, S. Arabia and the GCC countries should change their laws, as should many nations."
ReplyDeleteFarzana, Yes, but this notion that all cultures are equally right or wrong is stupid and dangerous -- there are lines to be drawn in acceptable human behaviour, when states are allowed to culturally influence one another. Anyway, it should be clear to us in a few years from now whether this news found GCC spirit for "liberal thought" sticks around or evaporates shortly.
"How can this be an eyewash when the Queen decided to visit and also honour her hosts? She could have refused to go."
Not sure what "eyewash" here is outside the context of gender-equality -- these are the same countries that insist women not show their faces in public even today, and we are supposed to believe this symbolic nonsense is worth something other than some mutual UK-GCC kissing up?
Yes, they can follow their culture in their own countries, if they want to, but they have a strong motivation to spread this culture and ideology around with their oil money, which is not acceptable in secular democracies...that is all I am saying.
I have no problems with maintaing good relations with the GCC countries as long as their culture and ideology stays in their territories, but I know for certain it won't, since cults do not work that way.
The British Govt. probably has very strong ideas on the response to such an invitation from the saudis, and not responding positively is probably not an option, given BP's (and other western oil companies) dependence on ME oil wells. Insulting the GCC is not an option, and in the end nobody wins.
All that said, I support the Indian govt's move to get closer to these GCC states, and I believe that they have taken appropriate precautions to ensure that oil money does not spread around in India without oversight.
Al
Farzana, thanks for the correction re: this being UAE and not KSA -- I agree there is a big difference. Oman, Qatar, Bahrain, UAE are relatively liberal compared to KSA.
ReplyDeleteAl
Seems kinda cheesy to me . . . :)
ReplyDeleteAl:
ReplyDeleteWhen you, rightly, point out the fallacy of all cultures being right or wrong, by extension it should indeed apply to ALL cultures. The GCC (and thanks for noticing the difference from KSA after the earlier posts, so you!)countries have always played safe and outside.
I am a bit chary about branding gender parity without cultural context.
Whether it is oil money or otherwise, most societies like to be well-lubricated!
- - -
Mstaab:
Rats! Emmental, my dear Watson?
"Then you, rightly, point out the fallacy of all cultures being right or wrong, by extension it should indeed apply to ALL cultures."
ReplyDeleteOf course, I would not have it any other way. :-)
But, the context of my statement is when cultures are allowed to influence one another, who gets to draw these lines and how? This demands the spelling out what all humans can expect at the end of this multicutural clusterf...raternity at the end of time, or a little earlier, when humans are still around.
Will our descendants think that it is okay to kick slaves and punch women under special circumstances, or will our monkey race be working together to build motels in space for visiting aliens? The step in either direction of humanity starts now and always, if we have all individually chosen to go one way rather than the other, the human race of the future will experience it. I plan to make sure none of my descendants are around to blame me for it at that point. :-)
"I am a bit chary about branding gender parity without cultural context. "
There is only one context and it is inside each of our heads when we think of ourselves. Are we all willing to treat everyone else like we would treat ourselves on our worst day? Or are we going to hide behind "culture" and "tradition" and "divine" excuses to justify our own hypocrisy, greed, guilt, and survival? The answer is to watch the night (and day) sky(ok, just kidding :-)) ..a great way to pass the time even if you get no answers to anything. Love, Al
Al:
ReplyDeleteBut, the context of my statement is when cultures are allowed to influence one another, who gets to draw these lines and how? This demands the spelling out what all humans can expect at the end of this multicutural clusterf...raternity at the end of time, or a little earlier, when humans are still around.
The influence of cultures across the board is limited, if we take culture in the larger context of civilisation. If we abrogate the drawing of lines to some, then we are not influenced by cultures but influence them.
Will our descendants think that it is okay to kick slaves and punch women under special circumstances, or will our monkey race be working together to build motels in space for visiting aliens?
Are you talking about Guantanamo Bay and the O.J.Simpson paradigm? Well, I know what you are trying to say and the reason I gave certain examples is to show that human behaviour can cross cultures; the difference lies in what is legitimised and what is not, at least on paper. The latter is, therefore, more easy to stand up to scrutiny and ridicule. Building motels isn’t a cultural shift, although how aliens are included in this would denote some cultural osmosis :)
I suppose your descendents will be safe if they like highways…
"I am a bit chary about branding gender parity without cultural context. "
There is only one context and it is inside each of our heads when we think of ourselves. Are we all willing to treat everyone else like we would treat ourselves on our worst day? Or are we going to hide behind "culture" and "tradition" and "divine" excuses to justify our own hypocrisy, greed, guilt, and survival? The answer is to watch the night (and day) sky(ok, just kidding :-)) ..a great way to pass the time even if you get no answers to anything.
I believe watching the sky and propitiating gods for whatever it is that falls from it is part of several traditions. The problem is you can’t hide beneath the sky. Well, what’s inside our heads is of course unlikely to leak!
"The influence of cultures across the board is limited, if we take culture in the larger context of civilisation. "
ReplyDeleteFV, Civilization and civilization are all words to describe the average behaviour of large groups of people -- the point is to shift the average towards progressive thought rather than regressive thought, so see-sawing between progressive and regressive under the excuse of culture and civilization is going to leave us where we are now. I don't care what happens to this planet after I am dead. Really.
"If we abrogate the drawing of lines to some, then we are not influenced by cultures but influence them. "
Both of it happens at the same time, but the opportunity for such cross-cultural influences has never been more than it is now, which means we will see the effects of this in the coming decades. As is usually the case, all sides will be influenced in different ways over time, but there are many cultures today that pride themselves on their insularity and would like to spread their "message" such as it is.
"Are you talking about Guantanamo Bay and the O.J.Simpson paradigm? "
I am talking about the Isaac Asimov, Arthur Clark, Larry Niven Paradigm. Clarke figured out geosynchronous satellites in his tales 40 years before it was implemented.
"Well, I know what you are trying to say and the reason I gave certain examples is to show that human behaviour can cross cultures; the difference lies in what is legitimised and what is not, at least on paper."
Exactly, and that legitimization will not be work if any one (or more) culture(s) want to dominate, and that is what will happen as a first step, and then there will conflict and violence, followed by an acceptance that it was all not a very good idea....and then those lessons will be lost in a few generations and it will all start over again. Humans destroy themselves after they reach the limits of their collective competence to organize themselves -- Peter's Principle recast.
" Building motels isn’t a cultural shift, although how aliens are included in this would denote some cultural osmosis :)"
I was being facetious -- the point is that scientific advancement and religious bullshit are incompatible in the long term. Look at the populace of the USA today -- what a sad degeneration from the stalwarts that went to the moon and did some incredible stuff. Why did it happen? Because the politicians in the Right think that their country is great because of their religion and culture, not because of scientific competence....so what you have is a regressive culture today that wants to rollback the teaching of Evolution in Class. The entire society will pay a big price because of this regressive behaviour -- but you gets what you work for.
" The problem is you can’t hide beneath the sky. Well, what’s inside our heads is of course unlikely to leak!"
Umm...this is not about hiding behind anything, but the opposite. I suppose everyone here thinks we humans (or a set of individuals) are fricking awesome. I doubt if you will say such a thing if you actually comprehend the night sky. Words like googol and googolplex exist to describe that vastness (Google is derived from Googol). Distances between stars and the number of astronomical entities in existence are in the order of Googolplex.
So if one thinks our Milky way is the best Galaxy ever out of the billions of galaxies that exist, and earth the bestest planet ever to exist, please contact me for a really low-priced bridge in Manhattan that I just placed on the market. The Human race is nothing more than a speck of dust in the Sahara Desert, though we all like to pretend otherwise, and if we all cease to exist, we will all be missed like that speck of dust in the desert.
Al
"The influence of cultures across the board is limited, if we take culture in the larger context of civilisation. "
ReplyDeleteFV, Civilization and civilization are all words to describe the average behaviour of large groups of people -- the point is to shift the average towards progressive thought rather than regressive thought, so see-sawing between progressive and regressive under the excuse of culture and civilization is going to leave us where we are now. I don't care what happens to this planet after I am dead. Really.
"If we abrogate the drawing of lines to some, then we are not influenced by cultures but influence them. "
Both of it happens at the same time, but the opportunity for such cross-cultural influences has never been more than it is now, which means we will see the effects of this in the coming decades. As is usually the case, all sides will be influenced in different ways over time, but there are many cultures today that pride themselves on their insularity and would like to spread their "message" such as it is.
"Are you talking about Guantanamo Bay and the O.J.Simpson paradigm? "
I am talking about the Isaac Asimov, Arthur Clark, Larry Niven Paradigm. Clarke figured out geosynchronous satellites in his tales 40 years before it was implemented.
"Well, I know what you are trying to say and the reason I gave certain examples is to show that human behaviour can cross cultures; the difference lies in what is legitimised and what is not, at least on paper."
Exactly, and that legitimization will not be work if any one (or more) culture(s) want to dominate, and that is what will happen as a first step, and then there will conflict and violence, followed by an acceptance that it was all not a very good idea....and then those lessons will be lost in a few generations and it will all start over again. Humans destroy themselves after they reach the limits of their collective competence to organize themselves -- Peter's Principle recast.
" Building motels isn’t a cultural shift, although how aliens are included in this would denote some cultural osmosis :)"
I was being facetious -- the point is that scientific advancement and religious bullshit are incompatible in the long term. Look at the populace of the USA today -- what a sad degeneration from the stalwarts that went to the moon and did some incredible stuff. Why did it happen? Because the politicians in the Right think that their country is great because of their religion and culture, not because of scientific competence....so what you have is a regressive culture today that wants to rollback the teaching of Evolution in Class. The entire society will pay a big price because of this regressive behaviour -- but you gets what you work for.
" The problem is you can’t hide beneath the sky. Well, what’s inside our heads is of course unlikely to leak!"
Umm...this is not about hiding behind anything, but the opposite. I suppose everyone here thinks we humans (or a set of individuals) are fricking awesome. I doubt if you will say such a thing if you actually comprehend the night sky. Words like googol and googolplex exist to describe that vastness (Google is derived from Googol). Distances between stars and the number of astronomical entities in existence are in the order of Googolplex.
So if one thinks our Milky way is the best Galaxy ever out of the billions of galaxies that exist, and earth the bestest planet ever to exist, please contact me for a really low-priced bridge in Manhattan that I just placed on the market. The Human race is nothing more than a speck of dust in the Sahara Desert, though we all like to pretend otherwise, and if we all cease to exist, we will all be missed like that speck of dust in the desert. This realization does wonders to one's ego if one is brave enough to internalize it, and few people are.
Al
FV,
ReplyDeleteThe stupid blog software claimed my posts did not make it so, I seem to have to posted the same thing a million times. Sorry about that. Please delete any/all posts as you see fit.
(scurries back into the dark...)
Al