“ I remember the papers hammering us with complaints about President Bush 'misleading' us into thinking Iraq was involved when, in fact, he came out on at least one occasion and said there was no evidence to support such a supposition. We had ample access to the facts but public perception and anger about 9/11 took us to war.”
…on at least one occasion in no way balances nor negates the hundreds of times the opposite was both overtly and covertly expressed…the video tapes of this are legion. As to what people know/don’t know in the US…I give a lot of credit to the news agencies. What one hears/sees about what is happening is determined by who funds the specific news outlet these days. This dismal change has helped to produce a bunch of dumb and dumber ‘citizens’. The now ancient quote from Goebbels at the Neurenberg trials about how easy it is to convince a people to go to war should be the title page in history books when it comes to such things. On Mar 5, 5:53 am, Don Johnson <[email protected]> wrote: > We still learn about Loyalists in public school here in the States. > As in most things we generally support the side of the bread with the > butter on it. Or as you bring up, the side of the bread we 'perceive' > has the butter on it. Perception is everything. > > Unfortunately one man's fact is another man's myth. In the build up > to the Iraq war, polls were taken here asking citizens why we were > going to war. A shocking majority said it was retaliation for the > 9/11 attacks. While I think it unlikely we would have invaded without > the attacks, I was under no illusion that Iraq was involved. I > remember the papers hammering us with complaints about President Bush > 'misleading' us into thinking Iraq was involved when, in fact, he came > out on at least one occasion and said there was no evidence to support > such a supposition. We had ample access to the facts but public > perception and anger about 9/11 took us to war. > > Another example is the surprising number of people, both Republicans > and Democrats, that don't know that Bill Clinton was impeached. They > can relate every sordid detail of the Monica Lewinski scandal but that > fairly major fact of history totally escapes them. People constantly > surprise me with their lack of knowledge of fairly well advertised > facts. Is this an American problem or is this pretty much universal? > I get the feeling most of the world thinks we're a bunch of idiots > over here. > > dj > > dj > > > > On Thu, Mar 5, 2009 at 7:16 AM, frantheman <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > The general awareness of history is very often based on "facts" which, > > subjected to closer analysis, are no more than myths or fables. The > > grandiose history of the American Revolution, for example, forgets the > > thousands of colonists who wanted to remain British; many of whom, > > after 1782, moved to Canada. The same is true of Irish history, where, > > only today, people are starting to remember the thousands of Irishmen > > who fought (and died) for Britain in WWI, or that the 1916 > > Revolutionaries, upon their arrest, were hissed and booed by crowds in > > Dublin, public opinion only swinging behind them after the authorities > > stupidly executed those they regarded as the ringleaders in one and > > twos over a two month period. It has always been known that history is > > generally written by the victors. > > > Not that it is often so important. What's usually more significant is > > not what actually happens or happened, but what people perceive to be > > happening or have happened. Still, given the right context, pinning > > down "facts" can be helpful - this is the basis of the Truth and > > Reconciliation Commissions which had a fair degree of success in South > > Africa and Northern Ireland. > > > Francis > > > On 5 Mrz., 11:34, archytas <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Just an incidental Orn - your scientific view (no qualms on my > >> interpretation here) is rather postmodern - on close scrutiny most > >> religious sagas become myths and fables - yet the myths and fables > >> themselves are part of a real history in the present. This seems > >> entirely sensible. It is statements of the fables as fact that > >> remains problematic, especially in legitimation through this in such > >> matters as shooting up cricket players or the more hidden forms in > >> Western foreign policy. > > >> On 2 Mar, 09:17, archytas <[email protected]> wrote: > > >> > Degeneration into an epistemology demanding linguistic acumen is very > >> > pertinent Orn. I tend to lapse back to an anecdote involving Ron Ions > >> > - paper illiterate and innumerate - yet by far the best performer in > >> > leadership-getting the job done activities over 6 months of courses. > >> > Hands like shovels, every bit a working stiff (a gourmand too, which > >> > no stereotyping would have predicted - he couldn't even do the Belbin > >> > Test on which the team issues were supposedly predicated). There is > >> > much we could learn and do from this insight of yours - though there > >> > is a paradox in needing to 'articulate' it. I read the NS stuff much > >> > as you have btw. > > >> > We are not likely to be Celts genetically Francis - but I take your > >> > point well. Religion is sorry stuff, yet fellowship surely is not > >> > (with some reservations about the gender connotation of the word). > >> > How do we move though in a fellowship not construed about in-group > >> > play and in 'mystery' that is not palpable nonsense requiring faith > >> > where there should be none that is at least not tentative - a regular > >> > point of yours? > > >> > My feeling is that 'soft skills' are essentially degenerate and lay us > >> > open only to manipulation. We need to know more on this and there are > >> > some pretty horrifying scientific explanations I suspect are true - > >> > including that we make decisions before we even start to think about > >> > them. > > >> > On 1 Mar, 20:11, frantheman <[email protected]> wrote: > > >> > > On 1 Mrz., 19:00, archytas <[email protected]> wrote: > > >> > > > I'm Scots Francis, so I have little interest in seeing other than a > >> > > > cricket score when Wales play England at the sport I was barred from > >> > > > because I took broken time payments that were often somewhat less > >> > > > than > >> > > > the "amateurs" took in "expenses". > > >> > > My profoundest apologies, Neil. I'm afraid I'm not completely free of > >> > > the Irish tendency to regard everyone living on the largest island in > >> > > the North-East Atlantic Archipelago simply as "Brit." Thnk you for > >> > > reminding me that we are really, in fact, Celtic cousins and, as such, > >> > > should be allies against the perfidious Sassenach. > > >> > > Sport remains a fascinating microcosm for politics and society, not > >> > > least because of its amazing capability for hypocrisy and because the > >> > > people in charge generally have nothing to do with any kind of > >> > > performance and productivity. Samaranch is proabably the greatest role > >> > > model in sport today. > > >> > > Francis > > >> > > > Science is close to making a bit more sense than Wittgenstein in > >> > > > terms > >> > > > of much that works in dialogue that is not easy to trace in the > >> > > > words. It may soon be possible to do some kind of "discourse > >> > > > analysis > >> > > > at speed" - or perhaps the turn will be the discovery some of us do > >> > > > have such a faculty. Deception is key in politics and the key in > >> > > > discourses of actual sciences is transparency. > >> > > > I've had the odd word with my grandson of late and he has loads of > >> > > > problems believing the biology of puberty or that I'm a biologist for > >> > > > that matter! He is working something out about lying at the moment. > >> > > > My guess is something goes wrong with this process because cheating > >> > > > and bullying really are the names of the language-games we play - and > >> > > > maybe (I think likely) these are built-in rather like 'rank' in > >> > > > social > >> > > > insects? My feeling is we are on the verge of a scientific unpacking > >> > > > of this stuff that will allow our debates to change and produce new > >> > > > 'leadership' forms - perhaps embodied in technology without us being > >> > > > run by Deep Thought. > >> > > > I'm afraid we are going to collapse to war before this. My guess is > >> > > > that what links foreign policy and bwanking is the false notion of > >> > > > cleverness put about. What actually happens is something we never > >> > > > know and the heroic stories are always told in retrospect. I wonder > >> > > > if we could detach idiot prejudices (Bacon's Idols) and fast-speed > >> > > > analysis - and find a way of making people argue under public > >> > > > scrutiny > >> > > > using new technologies, subjecting the votaries and worthies who have > >> > > > made 'negotiation' into a from of life to scientific scrutiny? > >> > > > I feel a lot of sympathy with what Don says above. The politicians > >> > > > are crap and make interventions that only work in terms of the > >> > > > publicity they generate and the lies they uphold. New Labour in the > >> > > > UK have been so bad they have only ensured that pretty committed > >> > > > democrats like me and Sue will never vote again. Brown and his > >> > > > cabinet sound more like Mugabe and his henchmen every day. They can > >> > > > admit no wrong. > > >> > > > On 1 Mar, 13:19, Don Johnson <[email protected]> wrote: > > >> > > > > On jobs. Whatever happened to apprenticeships? We call them > >> > > > > interns > >> > > > > now, I suppose-but most of those are expected to complete or be in > >> > > > > the > >> > > > > process of completing some form of higher(conformist) education. > >> > > > > Not > >> > > > > all professions have interns and I would argue our onerous 'minimum > >> > > > > wage' is mostly to blame. I know I'm beating a dead horse here > >> > > > > but it > >> > > > > seems to me every time Congress passes a law to regulate the > >> > > > > economy > >> > > > > it just mucks up the process and makes it less efficient. > > >> > > > > Montessori school has a decent rep. of encouraging originality. Of > >> > > > > course, this is only for the very young children. Looking back in > >> > > > > history, many of the truly innovative and brilliant were > >> > > > > practically > >> > > > > hermits. Less chance of being corrupted by humanity I suppose. Or > >> > > > > maybe they were just weird. > > >> > > > > “I would sooner live in a society governed by the first two > >> > > > > thousand > >> > > > > names in the Boston telephone directory than in a society governed > >> > > > > by > >> > > > > the two thousand faculty members of Harvard University.” -- > >> > > > > William F. > >> > > > > Buckley, Jr., c. 1965 > > >> > > > > I'd say I agree but I'd pick Provo, Utah over Boston. I'm just > >> > > > > sayin'. > > >> > > > > dj > > >> > > > > On Sun, Mar 1, 2009 at 1:14 AM, archytas <[email protected]> > >> > > > > wrote: > > >> > > > > > Einstein recommended impudence, and we might draw some ideas from > >> > > > > > certain polarities between which > > ... > > read more »- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups ""Minds Eye"" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/Minds-Eye?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
