Support the Blog — Buy This Book!
For Kindle and with free ePub version. Only $9.49 Great reading.
Here is what Gary Shapiro CEO of the Consumer Electronics Association (CEA) said: Dvorak's writing sings with insight and clarity. Whether or not you agree with John's views, he will get you thinking and is never boring. These essays are worth the read!
Put this ad on your blog!
Syndicate
Subscribe to Main Blog feed here:
Subscribe to Comments too (below):
Junk Email Filter
Is this a follow up on the infamous Fjordman article posted before?
I’m sure a couple of my bookmarked websites would fall into their category.
Canada, no less. Land of thought control.
Another good read… http://ksgnotes1.harvard.edu/Research/wpaper.nsf/rwp/RWP06-011
It’s hard for anyone to make sense of it all… One thing for sure, seeing Israel destroy the economic infrastructure of a neighbour makes me wonder who is the real terrorist…
After reading it a bit more… It seems like a pro Jewish paper trying to obfuscate some real problem associate with their actions…
Another good read… http://www.jewsnotzionists.org/
It could also be a great starting point for a “how-to” on discrediting anybody you don’t agree with, since most of the talking points were just specific points of view on what are basically generic characteristics of practically ANY group.
Another good reason to look at real world problems and not conspiracy… Maybe some conspiracy really exists, but Real problem DO REALY exists… We(human) need to concentrate of real problems… Do I need to enumerate…
Another good source of REAL daily problems… http://www.democracynow.org/
My thoughts exactly, Joao. I find myself spending a lot of time trying to read between the lines when I’m here, in spite of myself. Put it down to a lifetime of deconstructing Steely Dan lyrics. 😉
I hate sites like the example, though. “… And the weaponery to make the difference…”? Makes me want to stand up and say a few words in defense of hate when I see such animosity directed at an idea, however fearful or misdirected.
Webster’s first definition of hate attributes it to fear, anger, and a “sense of injury”, as though the notion were merely imaginary. Again, however, the subject is much the same as the old saw about “everyone discriminates”. The problem lies in applying a value judgement categorically, rather than individually, i.e. it’s pretty much the same philosophical problem that underlies so many disputes. The basic inability of most people to realize when they’re overgeneralizing.
People won’t stop overgeneralizing if we merely eliminate the concept of overgeneralizing. Merely eliminating the word hate will not end bigotry. In fact, the end product will be even more counterproductive, since the tendency to demonize the idea teaches people that fear, anger, and a sense of injury are, of themselves, indicative of character failure and morally wrong.
If you want an example of where the anti-intellectual left is screwing up the testosterone balance, this kind of disingenious BS is a lot better example than some Pete-Rose looking dyke in Doc Martins and a biker jacket declaring that masculine/feminine sex roles are a crock. Who on earth can actually take that kind of thing seriously? Misandry be damned, misogyny will always be the better part of misanthropy. Equality is an entitlement? Awesome! That means you suck, too.
Is western civilization going to collapse because it isn’t breeding fast enough? I tend to suspect that American Idol and MySpace are going to be pretty much the same no matter what the melanin content of their audience’s skin is. Is North America going to be taken over by North Americans? Fabulous. Give `em a hundred years or so of Bismark, North Dakota and Custer, Washington and they’ll be just as angry and pasty as me.
Yep. God bless this great nation, whatever that is, however much is left of it. For all it’s faults, it still has one thing going for it that no other country in the world can claim.
Me.
Whenever I read about racism, the example given is always the white supremicist people. They never talk about the black racists who are vocal and accepted in this country. I was shocked that they mentioned the latino group. I guess that’s progress.
The point is, I’m tired of racism being portrayed as a one-way thing. It’s obviously not. How about we work toward ending ALL racism, and try to make a world where people don’t feel the need to hate others. What a far fetched dream that is huh?
Well at least astro’s consistent. “Those dang Jews!”? I do not agree with many things that the Nation of Israel does. That I could say that same thing about every nation that exists today or has ever existed in the past does not forgive any of these nations actions. It does put them into perspective though. DogWings has an excellent point as do Max Bell, JoaoPT and xrayspex. Many people adopt the techniques of those they appose. Side A says never trust Side B and in response Side Be says never trust Side A. All in a win at all costs zero sum type world. A racist tells you that all of this race are criminals and the response is to say that none of that race are criminals. The most important thing to remember is that hatred, fear and paranoia are not the best emotions to use to make decisions on.
Another important thing to remember is that the idea of race is a made up concept used to group people together to form us vs. them scenarios. We have become so used to the idea of race we no longer challenge it. Religions are confused with race. This idea made sense to those in the past when one could say for certain that a Catholic would be a white european. The Catholic church is now composed of all “races”. You are as likely to find a Phillipono Priest as an IrishPriest in a Catholic Church. The amount of “white” converts to Islam is slowly eroding the idea of Muslims being “brown” people. Many generalizations are like lies of all types. They contain enough evidence to make them somewhat plausible, but not enough to make them actually true. DogWings dream may seam far fetched, but on an optomistic note i do believe we are closer to it being real than ever before. The comments that are made in this post and others are proof of that. Do you think this many people would have spoke up even fifty years ago, or felt secure enough to do so?
John
Do people really think that Israel has some plan to bomb its neighbors now and then for no reason? Why would they do that? If Lebanon would or could build its economy and society and leave Israel alone, do you really think Israel would just go bomb them occasionally just for the heck of it? This causes huge trouble for Israel’s economy as well. You will not convince me that a Jew would willingly interrupts\ his money supply. (how’s that for a stereo type)
I have no Idea how to solve this terrorist problem, but blaming Israel for it will not do it. I just do not see them as the bad guy here. As to all those innocent Lebanese … anyone else notice the interviews of those innocent people on the street. Most of them supported Hezbollah. I am putting the whole bunch in the crazy column.
10 Do people really think that Israel has some plan to bomb its neighbors now and then for no reason?
Reminds me of Charles Krauthammer’s recent column on “Hezbollah’s Hollow Victory”
A good read.
http://tinyurl.com/gsmqv
The Lebanese know that Israel bombed easy-to-repair airport runways when it could have destroyed the new airport terminal and set Lebanon back 10 years. The Lebanese know that Israel attacked the Hezbollah TV towers when it could have pulverized Beirut’s power grid, a billion-dollar reconstruction.
Hmmmmm.
All this race and religion thing are mostly covers and escape goats to mobilize populations.
If once the concept of tribe, and people was easy to define, it consisted of familiar relations (all the individuals on a small tribe are related to some extent) and linguistic proximities. These cohesion elements fostered similar religions or systems of belief. These same, traditional, factors are used on these “macro-tribes” we call nations. The ethnic, linguistic and religious similarities cannot, these days be evoked indistintively to achieve enough cohesion on a nation. These are often multiethnic and multi lingual entities. Governments, usually those that need some form of common thought, resort to the most basic and fundamental union traces. Religion it’s one of the most used. All remember the appeal to one sideness religions have. Calling other “infidels” or “hedons” or even motos like “one nation under god”. Right next on the table of tricks come the ethnic factors. Usually connected to religion but not exclusively. It’s the “Avarous Jew” used in the XX century, but with roots on reaching Old Testaments days. These day it’s another kind of ethnic/religious association: “Arab” and “Islam”. Americans can remember, in the not so distant past, terms and slogans like “Redskin” and “A good indian is a dead indian”.
Usually, gross generalizations are used to create factions. If one’s start thinking of the particularities of the other faction, soon starts thinking of it’s own factions, and discovering that, sometimes, it has more affinities with “them” than “us”.
One thing I didn’t speak of was economic forces. They were always in place, ever since the days one tribe would invade other tribe territory, because of the better hunting grounds. As the wealth of the human race rises, also rises Economic tension.
When looking at some modern conflict, one’s should remember that the picture isn’t always black or white. There are forces moving in the shadows, capitalizing on old tensions to achieve some goals that, not always, are clean cut.