Politics, Economics, and Religion


Politics, Economics, and Religion

Religion has so many connections to political and economic beliefs, there needs to be a place to identify linkages, problems, goals, options, action plans and evaluation criteria.  

Members: 118
Latest Activity: 16 hours ago

What is the purpose of life?

An eternal question, what is the purpose of life?, occupied philosophers’ thoughts throughout history. Stone pictographs reveal even primitive peoples reflected on this query. Each one has the capacity to define his or her personal thinking about politics, economics and religion.

Discussion Forum

New New Atheism?

Started by Bertold Brautigan. Last reply by Ruth Anthony-Gardner yesterday. 11 Replies

Chris Hall published an interesting essay in Alternet, picked up by Raw Story:Hitchens, Dawkins and Harris are old news — a totally different Atheism is on the riseCHRIS HALL, ALTERNET25 MAY 2016 AT 00:18 ET…Continue

Tags: Social, Justice, Atheism, New, Hitchens

An Extraordinary Discussion with Ibrahim Al-Buleihi

Started by Loren Miller. Last reply by Loren Miller on Wednesday. 2 Replies

I sometimes amaze myself with the discoveries I make in my wanderings about the internet, especially YouTube.  I just came upon the following video, which is a conversation between two Arabs, one of them being Ibrahim Al-Buleihi, a liberal writer…Continue

Tags: progress, Islam, East, West, Arab

Real (inflation-adjusted) market performance & all recessions since 1871 defined by National Bureau of Economic Research (NBER).

Started by Joan Denoo. Last reply by Joan Denoo May 4. 1 Reply

Just look at how unstable our economy is and has been the past 145 years! Yes, there are fewer recessions now than 100 or even 50 years ago. The people harmed by these fluctuations are people who work for a living. Their earning power and consumer…Continue

Comment Wall


You need to be a member of Politics, Economics, and Religion to add comments!

Comment by Joseph P on May 12, 2016 at 6:44pm

Yeah, I've read a few of Gibson's books.  Did he do a single one that wasn't dystopian?  The guy has issues.

Sort of like SMBC, when we get a run of 7 or 8 comics in a row which are just dark and messed up as hell.  Makes me want to shoot him an e-mail: "Zach, you doing alright, man?"

Comment by Bertold Brautigan on May 12, 2016 at 5:43pm

>by which they mean the billionaires and multinational corporations.

Who continually make obscene profits and aren't even willing to help foot the bill for infrastructure that keeps them going. Back in the 80s sci fi writer William Gibson did a great job of projecting what (then) future corporatocracy would look like. In short, they've already drowned government in the bathtub and the 99% are reduced to fighting over the scum in the soap ring.

Comment by Joseph P on May 12, 2016 at 5:32pm

I'm all for Bernie staying in it until the end of the primaries, on June 14th.  But if he's still down more than 5 points then, it's time to suspend his campaign.

Sure, he can try to extract some concessions from Hillary, in exchange for going away.  I hope he can help push her further to the progressive end of things, on the issues for which she's less so than he is, but he needs to think of the good of the party and progressivism in general.

And he really needs to freaking lay off of any more negative ads against Hillary.

I'm afraid that we're a long way from the sort of electoral reform that you're talking about.  Before we even worry about that, we should get rid of the freaking electoral college and overturn Citizens United.

Gotta love Citizens United.  It's the best in Orwellian doublespeak, calling a consortium of special-interest corporations a group of "citizens," with the stated objective of returning the government to citizens' control ... by which they mean the billionaires and multinational corporations.

Comment by Bertold Brautigan on May 12, 2016 at 4:31pm

Which is Trump and which is the party?

Comment by Grinning Cat on May 12, 2016 at 9:43am

This convinced me that Bernie Sanders should stay in the race until someone actually gets the Democratic nomination for president:

Hillary Clinton Takes a Step to the Left on Health Care (NYTimes)

For months [...] Hillary Clinton has resisted calls from Senator Bernie Sanders to back a single-payer health system [...]

But as she tries to clinch the nomination, Mrs. Clinton is moving to the left on health care and this week took a significant step in her opponent’s direction, suggesting she would like to give people the option to buy into Medicare. [...]

Mr. Sanders calls his single-payer health care plan “Medicare for all.” What Mrs. Clinton proposed was a sort of Medicare for more. [...]

(Hillary Clinton campaigned at the Mug ‘n Muffin in Stone Ridge, Va., on Monday. Credit Doug Mills/The New York Times)

Comment by Grinning Cat on May 12, 2016 at 9:30am

Agreed on superdelegates as crap!

Why not have a short campaign season (with publicly funded airtime for all candidates who reach a reasonable threshold of signatures), then a single election with range voting -- voters give separate scores to each candidate, highest average wins. No primaries, no spoilers.

(Each candidate can get a predetermined number of artificial "0" votes, to prevent the "unknown lunatic wins" scenario where a candidate wins with a tiny, rabid following while most voters have "no opinion".)

Comment by Joseph P on May 11, 2016 at 8:08pm

It feels like stealing it, though, and that's coming from someone who voted for Bernie and wishes he would have won.  The whole superdelegate thing is kind of crap, and if they turned a primary completely the other way, there would be a riot ... sort of like what we had in 1968.

If we're talking about a difference of 1 or 2 points, then that isn't as bad.  Bernie is down 9 points, though, and I don't think he's going to get closer.  Hillary is polling ahead about 10 points in California and 18 points in New Jersey.

Comment by Ruth Anthony-Gardner on May 11, 2016 at 4:57pm

Joseph, I don't think flipping superdelegates counts as stealing the nomination, because the function of supedelegates is to steal the nomination from registered Democrats. That's like charging the guy retrieving a stolen purse from the hands of a purse-snatcher, to return it to the owner, as a thief.

To change the topic, a quote:

... under the Obama administration’s corporate-friendly “all of the above” energy policy, the United States became the largest oil producer on the planet and massively expanded fracking ... Sorry, you can’t claim to take climate science seriously and at the same time vastly expand your national production of oil and gas. That’s not a credible climate plan. It’s a form of climate denial. [emphasis mine]

Other Universities Are Divesting From Fossil Fuels—but Harvard Is D...

image source

He's been a disappointment to me.

Comment by Grinning Cat on May 11, 2016 at 11:47am

How many Republicans does it take to change a lightbulb? None. They would waste millions on “investigations” to blame Obama for the burnt out bulb, block any attempts to install a new one, and insist that we replace it with a candle. (Occupy Democrats)(image source; serial comma added)

One Facebook commenter wrote, "You're making the assumption that they know what a light-bulb is!"

Comment by Joseph P on May 11, 2016 at 10:46am

Bernie in the primary; Hillary in the general.  That's been my stance since June or July of last year.

He came a hell of a lot closer than I thought he would, but it's more or less over, at this point.  I can't see him flipping 90% of the superdelegates to his side, and I don't think he should anyway.  It would look like stealing the nomination, when they're this far apart in pledged delegates.


© 2016   Atheist Nexus. All rights reserved. Admin: Richard Haynes.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service