Keith Addison wrote:
(Uberpatriots and Jingoism)
> Rather noticeable, yes. Different forums have different cultures.
But I'm baffled by people who can't get along here. This is a VERY
diverse place, yet among the regular contributors there seems to be a
degree of respect that I seldom find elsewhere.
(Reading and understanding)
> I'm sure he's proof against it, we've seen it time and again. Some of
> these people will flatly deny what they said yesterday, though it's
> there on public record for all to see. All but them, if they don't
> want to see it. They have impregnable protective screens and they're
> memory editors.
Yes, I remember a discussion we had along these lines in the past.
It seems that being "right" is more important than being honest. The
children with whom I work often suffer from a similar problem. They
believe that the "smart" kids are the ones who don't need education
and always get the answers right.
Where does this idea come from?
It's an interesting characteristic to observe, but I don't appreciate
the mentality you've described above being used on me, and given the
history of this forum, I'm confident most others feel the same. (Todd
may be the exception, but then, Todd IS exceptional!)
> I definitely don't think that all people who hold these or similar
> views and persuasions behave that way, just a minority, and the other
> "side" is not without it's knee-jerk nutters either. But this guy is
> violent, he's too far gone, and he's far from alone. I think it's a
> matter of personal integrity, and people like this don't really have
> any.
Hmm. . . You remain far more optimistic about human nature than I.
Living here in North America, having witnessed all manner of hatreds
throughout my life, I think the attitude we're talking about here is
very common. I deal with this kind of lunacy all the time.
> Integrity doesn't necessarily go with one set of views and
> persuasions and not another.
If I'm giving you that impression, I'm communicating badly. It
seems, however, that "flock mentality" is a pervasive problem among
neo-cons in the United States right now. I used to wonder what
happened to the Republican party, but as I've looked into this more
carefully, I've come to the conclusion that I had my own set of
delusions about sweetness and light under which my mind operated.
There HAS been a paradigm shift in mentality among the majority of
people who call themselves "conservative" in the United States. That
shift, however, has left me behind.
> I really don't care whether people are
> so-called right-wing or left-wing or whatever race or religion, just
> as long as they're honest. I think nearly everyone is honest at
> heart, but it gets bent, often by outside forces, not by volition.
On this we disagree, Keith. It's just not been my experience.
> By the way, don't you think this is quite interesting?
>
> Merriam-Webster Online
> Based on your online lookups, the #1 Word of the Year for 2005 was:
> 1. integrity
> 2. refugee
> 3. contempt
> 4. filibuster
> 5. insipid
> 6. tsunami
> 7. pandemic
> 8. conclave
> 9. levee
> 10. inept
> http://www.m-w.com/info/05words.htm
Yes, very interesting.
>
> For one thing, not that it matters very much but Internet spelling is
> generally bad, even in searches - are they managing to spell it right
> because they're copying and pasting from somewhere else? From the
> online print media perhaps? I mean, if you can spell integrity right
> would you need to look it up? :-/
That thought was similar to mine. I asked my eldest son (who is 11)
to define the words, and aside from "insipid" and "filibuster", he did
pretty well. Given that he's had very little formal schooling in
English, since he's in a French Immersion program, his ability to
define most of the words in that list underscores pretty weak language
skills among the online population.
Of course, we don't really know who was looking up those words,
either. A vast number of non-native English speakers use the
internet, so maybe the results can be explained by lack of experience
with the language. Of course, it can be argued that in the political
realm at least, the words "integrity" and "inept" are mutually exclusive!
> Hm, doesn't include jingoism, what a surprise.
That's because nobody listens to me!
(Sweetness and light)
> Not at all Robert. IMHO what's very important to note is that it's
> over the last 25-30 years that neo-liberal economics has held sway,
> and that both the neocons and the far-right "Christians" have been
> putting their programs into action, and that the use and sheer volume
> and effectiveness of spin and consent manufacturing has exploded,
> especially in the US, while media ownership and control have
> imploded, especially in the US. All these at the same time, following
> Watts and the late sixties-early seventies. It may have been a
> reaction to what happened in those days rather than just a continuing
> symptom of something long endemic. I think the last 25-30 years is
> something of an era in its own right, not separated from what went
> before but different in some essential ways.
Yet there are so many historic parallels. The quality of political
rhetoric and the quality of speech on news broadcasts has declined
significantly since the days of Edward Murrow. However, the same
interventionist idealism that dominated discussions in the 1960's
thrives in the United States. We went to Vietnam to "make the world
safe for democracy". Now we've invaded Iraq under a similarly
ridiculous pretext. (While at the same time, denouncing the terrorist
organization Hamas for winning the most recent election in Palestine.
So much for integrity!) I recall atrocities done in Southeast Asia,
and we've learned that torture and trigger-happiness still exist among
certain members of the US military. I remember ridicule of the
concept of peak oil production in the US during the late '60s, and I
hear the same arguments now for world oil production.
Surely there ARE some differences. I think George Orwell had it
right (though his timing was off by a few years) and Josef Goebbels
would be quite comfortable in the current administration. That
wouldn't have been the case 40 years ago. However, it seems that
we've got to have something to fear in order to justify our investment
in armaments. We've gone from communism to terrorism now, but the
warning words of President Eisenhower and Edward Murrow from the
1950's STILL ring true today.
> Life for humans and pre-humans too has always been far more a
> cooperative venture. Yes, all abuses are old, but to ascribe to them
> a major and continuing role in our social development is a Victorian
> idea and it's quite easily debunked. It's yet another out-of-place
> idea that's gained more and more sway in the popular mind over the
> last 25-30 years, wonder why that might be (not!)?
Ok, I think I'm not expressing my intent correctly. I'm not excusing
deviant behavior, merely pointing out that it has its roots in very
ancient patterns. We are free to control our urges and impulses, and
for the most part, the role of socialization requires such restraint.
>
> Please have a read of this, you'll enjoy it:
>
> http://snipurl.com/o8fg
> Foreign Affairs
> A Natural History of Peace
> By Robert M. Sapolsky
> From Foreign Affairs, January/February 2006
>
> Not the whole story though. A major difference is that the pre-human
> apes left the forests and took to the plains and what happened to
> them there. Plains, note, not caves!
I get an error when I try to go there.
>> I wrote a song about racism once that deals with the apparent
>>"normalcy" of North American society. One lines goes:
>>
>> "We're expecting peace when our leaders meet
>> while we hate the man who lives down the street
>> and in anger, we lose all aplomb
>> and resolve our disputes with a fist,
>>or a gun, or a bomb"
>
>
> Good, Robert! Is it rock'n'roll? :-) The "we" is only some of us though, IMHO.
Of course it's rock 'n' roll! (And it REALLY rocks!) The "we"
refers to the people in my hometown, a place where swastikas STILL
adorn the light posts, and while I apply the concept of racism to the
country as a whole, I only do so because that's the behavior I
observe. Too bad I can't post a recording . . . (It would have to BE
recorded, first!)
> Aw gee. It's not as unethical as selling weapons in order to start a
> civil war though, and dull kitchen knives aren't as bad as napalm,
> landmines, cluster bombs, white phosphorus and DU. You don't buy it
> huh. Sigh. I guess I'll just have to stick to flogging porno videos
> to Mike Weaver.
!!!
robert luis rabello
"The Edge of Justice"
Adventure for Your Mind
http://www.newadventure.ca
Ranger Supercharger Project Page
http://www.members.shaw.ca/rabello/
_______________________________________________
Biofuel mailing list
Biofuel@sustainablelists.org
http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel_sustainablelists.org
Biofuel at Journey to Forever:
http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html
Search the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (50,000 messages):
http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/
