Religion allowed Sumer, Egypt and Europe to be Great

Posted by PITHOCRATES - November 15th, 2011

History 101

Religion Allowed Sumerians and Egyptians to Work Together and Live in Crowded Urban Cities

The world’s first civilization was Sumer.  Which included a series of city-states in Mesopotamia.  That land between the Tigris and Euphrates rivers.  Modern day Iraq.  And at the center of each city was a temple.  A ziggurat.  A multilevel structure that was broad at the base.  Narrow at the top.  Kind of like a pyramid.  But it wasn’t for entombing the dead.  Its height made it a ‘bridge’ to their gods.  It was at the top of these ziggurats where the priests performed their sacred rituals.  Ruled over the people.  Organized their large-scale farming.  Irrigation.  And their civilization.  Their food surpluses, the key to an advanced civilization, were stored at or near the ziggurat.  And the priest-king distributed the food to the people.

The world’s second civilization was Egypt.  Home of the pyramids.  That entombed their dead in elaborate rituals.  To help them enter the afterlife.  During the Old Kingdom one man ruled all of Egypt.  The pharaoh.  But he wasn’t just a king.  He was a god.  The people worshipped the pharaoh.  And worked at his direction.  The pharaoh directed the massive irrigation works.  The farming.  Managed the food surpluses.  And the people served their gods.  Possibly built the pyramids for them.  Out of love.  For some evidence suggests that slaves may not have built the pyramids as once thought.  But that they willingly joined together to build these tombs out of love and/or respect for their beloved pharaohs.

The first two great civilizations were theocracies.  Religion was the basis of their governments.  And the religious authority ruled.  Whether it be a priest-king.  Or a pharaoh.  A god to the people.  They organized and directed the people to do the things that made these civilizations great.  And the people did great things.  For their cities.  And their god(s).  For their religion was the great unifying factor that allowed a great number of people to live in crowded urban settings.  And work towards a common goal.

During the Dark Ages Charlemagne used Christianity to Unite Europe

Civilization advanced from these humble but great beginnings.  Religious thinking led to other thinking.  And everything great that followed.  Math.  Science.  History.  Physics.  And metaphysics.  We were thinking about our present.  And remembering our past.  The Greeks took thinking to great heights.  Figured out much of what we know today.  Alexander the Great took the glory that was Greece and spread it to the known world.  Then the Romans spread it to the parts of the world Alexander did not conquer.  The grandeur that was Rome was, in fact, Greek.

But the greatness peaked during the Roman Empire.  And then the Germanic tribes to the north sacked Rome.  And plunged Europe into the Dark Ages.  A world devoid of glory.  Where the hands of time were turned back a millennium or two.  Or three.  But all was not lost for Europe.  Because there was Christianity.  For the Roman Empire was a Christian empire.  And that’s something the people of Europe did not lose.  Their religion.  Which was the unifying force of the kingdoms that followed.  Including the great Charlemagne.  The unifier of Europe during the Dark Ages.  For Charlemagne was a devout Christian.  And even ascended to the throne as Holy Roman Emperor.

The rise of Islam in the holy Christian lands led to the Christian Crusades.  While in the ancient cities around the Mediterranean the Christians found a lot of lost Greek texts.  Brought them back to Europe.  To Christian monasteries.  And started that thinking all over again.  Leading to the Renaissance.  And the Enlightenment.  Picking up basically where the Greeks and Romans left off.  Making Europe the dominant region for centuries to come.

A lack of Religion and Spiritual Understanding Empowered Dictators to Kill their own People

Throughout history religion has made life better.  From its earliest days that simply allowed people to live and work together.  To developing a love for our fellow man.  Which restrained our most base instincts.  And calmed the savage breast.  Don’t believe this?  Just look at the worst genocides.

In sheer numbers it’s a tossup who killed more of their own people.  Joseph Stalin (the Soviet Union).  Or Mao Tse-Tung (the Peoples Republic of China).  In terms of a percentage of their population it’s no contest.  Pol Pot (Cambodia) wins that honor.  He killed some 20% of his own people.  And what do these three have in common?  They were all communists.  And their official religion?  None.  They were atheists.

Which is probably what let these dictators commit these cruel acts of barbarism against their own people.  Because they had no spiritual understanding of this life.  Or the afterlife.  So they had little to lose in their eyes.  Nothing to give them pause in unleashing all that repressed cruelty that advanced civilizations worked so hard to suppress.

www.PITHOCRATES.com

Share

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Religion

Posted by PITHOCRATES - November 14th, 2011

Economics 101

Living Together in Large Cities goes against a Million Years or so of Evolution

Agriculture advances gave us food surpluses.  Food surpluses gave us a division of labor.  The division of labor gave us trade.  Money made that trade more efficient.  By reducing high search costs inherent in the barter system.  And this efficient trade gave us advanced civilizations.  For these developments allowed great gatherings of people to live together in urban settings.  Well, these things, and something else.

For a million years or so man was a hunting and gathering species.  Which meant they traveled in small groups.  And followed food.  Why small groups?  Fewer mouths to feed.  Remember, hunters and gatherers need a lot of land to survive.  Because food wasn’t so plentiful in any one area.  And the last thing they wanted when they found food was to share it.  So when they weren’t killing their food they were killing those trying to take their food.  Which was the key to survival.  For he who eats today shall live to see tomorrow.  When the Europeans settled North America the Native Americans were still hunters and gatherers.  And they were a martial people.  Fierce warriors populated their tribes.  Why?  To protect tribal hunting grounds.  By killing any interlopers.  And they were doing this long before the Europeans set foot onto the continent.

So living together in large cities goes against a million years or so of evolution.  Which is why it didn’t happen overnight.  The transition from hunting and gathering to farming.  Before we could work together we had to learn to live together first.  And it all started with thinking.

Religion allowed People to Live Together like Family who were not Family

As we thought and developed better tools and better ways to farm we started thinking about something else, too.  Why are we here?  Who created ‘here’?  Why did the creator create ‘here’?  And what happens when we leave ‘here’?  After we die?  To answer these questions we developed religion.  And it brought us together as a people.

This is truly what separated us from the animals.  Because animals can use tools.  A bird can hold a stick in its beak to probe a hole for food.  But birds don’t worship.  They don’t have faith.  Only man does.  Because we started thinking about other things.  To see the bigger picture.  To understand this life.  And the next life.  Spiritually.  And this was the key to allowing great gatherings of people to live together in urban settings.  Religion allowed people to live together like family.  Who were not family.  Because we shared a common faith.  A religion.

Man was still cruel, though.  We spent a million years or so being cruel.  And that capacity to be cruel just didn’t go away.  But religion softened us.  It began a process to soothe the savage breast.  It allowed us to see something in people that wasn’t threatening.  And it allowed civilization to flourish.  Despite our cruelties.  Which were now reserved for those outside our own civilization.  Our enemies.  Heretics.  Especially those who attacked us.  And it was on these people, those who did not share our common faith, that we unleashed that repressed cruelty.

Religion Allowed us to Live in Crowded, Urban Cities Creating Commerce and Trade

A lot of atrocities have been committed in the name of religion.  This is true.  But sharing a common faith united us like nothing else could.  For our faith was bigger than us.  We learned to live by moral codes.  We worked together.  Voluntarily.  For the betterment of the cities we lived in.  And to serve our god(s).  In cities that priest-kings typically ruled over.  Guided by our religious beliefs.

Everything we did was for that spiritual journey.  Working hard in this life.  All the while preparing for the afterlife.  Bringing the people of a common faith together.  We became so close to each other that for the first time in history we could live in crowded, urban cities.  Creating commerce and trade.  In an advanced civilization.  None of which would have been possible if religion hadn’t softened up that cruelty within.  Instilled in us for the past million or so years.

www.PITHOCRATES.com

Share

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

When Democrat Policies Fail and they Fall in the Polls they Scramble to Endorse Reaganomics

Posted by PITHOCRATES - October 5th, 2011

Democrats have Blamed every ill known to Mankind on Reaganomics

The Left hates Ronald Reagan.  Proclaimed the era of Reagan was over.  No more were these Reagan Republicans going to screw over the poor so the rich can live a better life.  Yes, they hated this man with a passion.  And everything he stood for.  This supply-sider of the Austrian School.  He and is unfunny Laffer Curve.  This cold-hearted tax cutter.  But now they love him.  Why?  Because he supported taxing the rich.

I’ll pause a moment for those of you who have fallen out of your chairs.  Ready?  Good.

You know Congressional Democrats are grasping at straws to promote their policies when they claim their archenemy would have supported them, too.  You know why they’re trying, though, don’t you?  If you listened to the protesters on Wall Street you should know.  With their control of public school teachers and college professors (both dependent on taxpayer money for generous pay and benefit packages), they can revise history.  And keep kids ignorant.  Hopefully keeping them oblivious of things they don’t want them to know.  Such as the true legacy of Ronald Reagan (see MILLER: Ripping off the Gipper by Emily Miller posted 10/4/2011 on The Washington Times).

Liberals are trying to twist Ronald Reagan’s words to muster support for raising taxes. House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi’s press office sent a memo on Monday to congressional Republicans claiming they’d found evidence proving that President Reagan was the real inspiration for President Obama’s tax-the-rich “Buffett Rule.” The California Democrat posed the question: “What would Reagan do?”

The correct answer is: He would cut taxes. Mrs. Pelosi’s memo sends people over to the liberal Think Progress website, where a video montage interweaves clips of Mr. Obama and Reagan saying apparently similar things about tax rates. “We’re going to close the unproductive tax loopholes that allow some of the truly wealthy to avoid paying their fair share,” said the Gipper.

You’re supposed to think that’s just what Mr. Obama is doing, but the liberals edited out the context of the 40th president’s remarks. In a June 1985 speech at an Atlanta high school, he called for a total overhaul of the tax system. He wanted loopholes closed to lower the tax rates for everyone, for a net reduction in the tax burden. Congressional Republicans point out that’s precisely the opposite of what the Democrats are now trying to do.

You see, the Democrats can’t rely on telling the truth to pass their policies.  Because their policies only benefit those in government.  And those who live like parasites on the wealth creators.  Such as those protestors on Wall Street.  Who want the wealth of the wealth creators.  But want no part of capitalism which created that wealth.  And are too ignorant to understand that you can’t have one without the other.

Thank you public school teachers and college professors.

So they must lie.  Revise history.  To try and fool people into believing that their policies are just like Ronald Reagan’s.  And apparently hoping people don’t remember that Democrats have blamed every ill known to mankind on these very same policies.  ReaganomicsTrickledown economics.  The scourge of mankind.  But the majority of Americans apparently love the big lug so they’ll swallow back their bile and say, hey, we love him, too.  And hope that the grimace on their face doesn’t look as bad or as painful as it feels.

Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac created America’s Financial Mess, not Wall Street

So where did these Wall Street protests come from?  Where did the primary impetus come from?  Apparently Canada.  Thanks, Canada.  As if the corrupting influence of Terrance and Phillip wasn’t enough already.  So I guess we have to Blame Canada (Warning:  Blame Canada contains adult content) for this, too (see Occupy Toronto leaderless, unfocused but hopeful by Dana Flavelle posted 10/4/2011 on the Toronto Star).

The Wall Street protests were inspired by Canadian anti-consumer magazine Adbusters.

Editor in chief and co-founder Kalle Lasn said he’s been calling for this kind of protest movement for 20 years.

It’s finally happening because people are angry with the financial fraudsters on Wall Street who created America’s economic mess and largely went unpunished, he said in a telephone interview from Vancouver.

But that isn’t who created America’s financial mess.  It was government.  Specifically the government sponsored enterprises (GSE) Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.  If it wasn’t for them buying and/or guaranteeing risky subprime mortgages there would have been no subprime mortgage crisis.

That was government policy.  Putting as many people into houses as possible.  Even if they couldn’t afford them.  That wasn’t Wall Street.  Wall Street was merely an accessory after the fact.  Aiding and abetting Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.  By selling those toxic subprime mortgages in collateralized debt obligations (CDOs).  Promoting them as high yield yet low risk.  Because they were backed by mortgages, historically the safest loans in all of America.  So investors bought these.  Not knowing how risky they were.  But you know who knew how risky they were?  The GSEs Fanny and Freddie.  Because they bought them.  And remember what the ‘G’ stands for in GSE.  Government.

If you removed government from this equation mortgage bankers would not have approved these risky subprime mortgages.  Because that risk would have been on their books.  But when government said ‘don’t worry  we’ll take that risk off of your books’ what did they have to lose in approving risky subprime mortgages?  Less harassment from the government for not approving mortgages for the poor and minorities who didn’t qualify?  Yeah, like they were going to miss that harassment.

If these protestors want to protest those responsible they should protest government.  Not Wall Street.

Damn Canadians.  If it’s not making our kids fart and curse they’re getting them to protest the wrong people.  (Editor’s note:  We like Canada and Canadians.  And mean them no disrespect.  We’re just having a little fun with the movie South Park: Bigger, Longer & Uncut.  In which incidents lead to war between Canada and the U.S.  A premise so ridiculous that it’s funny.  For Canada and the U.S. have been the best of friends.  And will always be the best of friends.)

The more Public Sector Union Employees paying Dues the more Money is collected for Democrat Coffers

Perhaps that’s the problem.  Too much government.  The federal government has grown into a behemoth.  On top of thousands and thousands of local governments throughout the country (see Infographic: Local government by the numbers by Mary Mahling and Carla Uriona posted 10/4/2011 on Stateline).

There are 89,476 local governments in the United States. They include counties, cities, villages, towns and townships, as well as special districts that handle utilities, fire, police and library services.

That’s a lot of government.  And there’s only one way to pay for a lot of government.  With a lot of taxes.

So we have government upon government upon government.  Surely with all that government we must be getting some value for all of these taxes.

More than two centuries of American democracy have resulted in a profusion of governments at the local level, not only cities and counties but villages and townships, park districts and sanitary districts and a host of others. To those trying desperately to bring a state’s budget into balance, many of these are useless anachronisms incapable of providing any service that could not be provided higher up the governmental chain. But to the tens of thousands of people who hold office in these local entities — and to millions of citizens who live within them — multiple local governments are a crucial piece of evidence that American democracy reaches down to the grassroots level.

Apparently not.  And don’t call me Shirley.

They just provide a lot of jobs for the unemployable.  By taxing the wealth creators.  And redistributing it to people whose job is a duplicate of one at another level of government.

They do serve a purpose, though.  Being totally funded by taxpayers, they have a vested interest to keep raising taxes on the taxpayers.  Which is, of course, helpful to Democrats.  So the more local governments the better.  The more public sector union employees paying dues the more money finds its way into Democrat coffers.

Any Attempt to Quantify Human Behavior will Ultimately Fail

And then you have academe.  And Keynesian economists.  Furthering the growth of government with their government-spending Keynesian economics (see Tis The Gift To Be Simple by Paul Krugman posted 10/5/2011 on The New York Times).

To be sure, IS-LM is an attempt to squeeze a dynamic economy into a static model, which is why people like me usually cross-check our conclusions with something intertemporal. But it’s actually a pretty darn sophisticated approach — as demonstrated by the fact that economists who dismiss or attack IS-LM as too simplistic or something almost always end up making assertions that are much more simplistic than IS-LM, if not falling into outright logical fallacies. In fact, I can’t think of a single exception to this rule: every attack on IS-LM I’ve ever seen (as opposed to suggestions that we should also look at more complex models) was followed by some kind of empirical or logical howler.

I have a criticism.  Any attempt to quantify human behavior will ultimately fail.  Because you can’t quantify human behavior.

Economics belong to the branch of science we call social sciences.  That is, it’s not real science.  Because the wildcard is that human behavior can always produce some unintended consequence to government action.  Such as Prohibition giving us organized crime.  Whereas the equations of science typically don’t.  We can use science to build bridges, buildings and airplanes.  And they work pretty much as planned.  Without any unintended consequences.

You can’t represent human behavior by mathematical formulas.  We know some behavioral responses.  Such as sex in advertising gets men’s attention.  But that’s a base primeval instinct.  There’s not a whole lot of thinking going on.  Not so in a complex economy.  Where there is a lot of thinking going on.  Keynesians like to think the economy is as simple as impulse buying at the point of sale checkout aisle.  Put more candy on display and you sell more candy.  Not so with buying a house.

Everyone will like to own a beautiful home.  But people won’t buy a house on impulse.  Not when there’s record unemployment.  And talk of a double-dip recession.  Because if you learned anything from the subprime mortgage crisis it’s this.  Too much debt is bad.  And there is no such thing as a guaranteed job.  Playing with interest rates won’t change that.  Only time will.  When enough time has passed to let people feel secure in their jobs again.  Then and only then will they consider taking on debt again.  No matter what the IS-LM model predicts.  Because you can’t quantify human behavior.

The Wall Street Protestors with Student Loan Debt Probably don’t have Science or Engineering Degrees

All government policy is social science.  It’s not an exact science.  That’s why strange things happen.  Unintended things.  Whenever government tries to influence behavior.  And when government tries they have a track record of failure.  Which is why they don’t run for reelection on the success of their policies.  They run on the success of someone else’s (Ronald Reagan’s) policies.  And say that their policies are the same.  And they are except with a few minor changes.  And by ‘few’ I mean they couldn’t be any more different.  So they lie.  Or they just demonize their opponents.

But our kids are blissfully ignorant.  Thanks to public school teachers.  And college professors.  Who care more about improving their taxpayer funded pay and benefits than education.  That’s why government grows.  And why we have degrees like women’s studies.  And poetry.  Degrees that offer no hope for employment in a capitalistic economy.  For what business that relies on pleasing their customers (like Apple does consistently) need people with these skills?

No.  They need people with science and engineering degrees.  You know, the hard ones.  So the kids who took the easy route in college must depend on teaching others their worthless knowledge.  Or get a government job.  Which has a lot to do with the anger of these protestors who have huge student loan debt.  And no job.  Because if they hate capitalism you can guess what their degrees are in.

(Editor’s note:  This was written before news of Steve Jobs’ passing broke.  Our condolences go out to his family.  We decided to leave the Apple reference in as a tribute to Steve Jobs.  He was one of America’s greatest entrepreneurs.  The world is a better place because of him.  For the gifts he gave us.  And the inspiration he gave to the next generation of great entrepreneurs.)

www.PITHOCRATES.com

Share

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,