|
Post by Aravis on Jan 27, 2005 1:30:13 GMT -5
In a similar fashion to Iraq- we declare that they are a threat and attack. Which would be mad. You'd have to have a colosally stupid president to....
oh.
|
|
|
Post by RobertGraves on Jan 27, 2005 2:29:46 GMT -5
Exactly!
|
|
|
Post by Wyndham on Jan 27, 2005 17:12:07 GMT -5
More poetry (apologies to Eliot): We are the hollow men We are the stuffed men Leaning together Headpiece filled with straw. Alas! Our dried voices, when We whisper together Are quiet and meaningless As wind in dry grass Or rats' feet over broken glass In our dry cellar . . .
Those who have crossed With direct eyes, to death's other Kingdom Remember us -- if at all -- not as lost Violent souls, but only As the hollow men The stuffed men . . .
This is the way the world ends This is the way the world ends This is the way the world ends Not with a bang but with a JESUS H. CHRIST! I JUS WANNA KNOW WHY THE HELL SOMEBODY DIDN'T TELL ME YOU GET ME YOU GET ME d*ck AND DON ON THE HORN RIGHT NOW FREEDOM FOR IRAN WASN'T SUPPOSTA END THIS WAY HONEST IT WASN'T HONEST
|
|
|
Post by RobertGraves on Jan 28, 2005 2:42:36 GMT -5
'YOU GET ME d*ck AND DON ON THE HORN is that the swear program or what?
|
|
|
Post by Tenarke on Jan 29, 2005 16:44:21 GMT -5
Perhaps Capt. Ahab might heave his harp**n at it.
|
|
|
Post by Aravis on Feb 21, 2005 16:14:03 GMT -5
And yet it lets me say "dumbass" or even just "ass."
|
|
|
Post by Wyndham on Mar 3, 2005 9:51:22 GMT -5
Some of you are probably aware about the shit-storm recently created in Harvard when the President of the University suggested that more women weren't teaching hard science there because, well, women in general don't think that way with sufficient brilliance to justify the appointments. Wish I was there! Here's an op ed piece that speaks to some of the underlying issues. Thought provoking, and worth the occasional chuckle: www.city-journal.org/html/eon_02_24_05hm.html
|
|
|
Post by Wyndham on Mar 3, 2005 9:58:14 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Wyndham on Mar 9, 2005 12:25:51 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by RobertGraves on Mar 9, 2005 14:23:52 GMT -5
Great articles.
|
|
|
Post by Tenarke on Mar 11, 2005 16:08:01 GMT -5
Yes; I will second that.
Reading Ms. Rubin’s article; particularly the points that she makes about the negative effects of “political correctness” in discussing the many grey areas of current social problems; I was reminded of the other article Wyndham posted 2/16 on General Hot Topics, from the NY Metro, re “Liberal Guilt”.
It may well be that while we are busily finding nits to pick; the right wing is busy stealing the entire animal.
Perhaps the underlying question is that of a democratic government itself. Is the ordinary citizen capable of making the informed and sophisticated decisions necessary to participate in his own government? Ancient political thinkers supposed not and preferred some sort of aristocracy. This at first looks attractive; however history shows that the “aristos” can be hard to define. Again and again, the power collected by a permanent ruling class, no matter how defined, has corrupted and their decisions have then changed to benefit the governors rather than the governed.
Again, critics of popular government were concerned that the ordinary citizen not capable of understanding the higher principles of governing would be easily swayed and led by demagogs offering simplistic solutions to complex realities. Though this notion is not currently “politically correct” there is some truth to it.
So far the most practical solution has been some form of government which permits and encourages periodic bloodless revolutions called elections, permitting “hoi polloi” to turn the rascals out. Not really a perfect form of government, but so far, better than anything else.
One can see that the pendulum swings back and forth throughout history. During good times when life is relatively easy for the average citizen; he has work which is not too onerous, he knows where the next meal is coming from and he feels that he and his family are secure; then politics and politicians are not uppermost on his mind. But when times are not that good and don’t ever look to be getting any better, then there is general popular discontent; the stuff of revolution. This is incoherent potential political energy only until it finds a leader, or until a leader finds it and the discontent is defined and directed.
Hopefully the leader is more of a Dr. King than an A. Hitler.
With good leadership this power of public discontent can be used to restore a government that once again deals with the well being of the ordinary Joe. Unfortunately, once contented, ordinary Joe again looses interest in politics and here we go again.
This I think poses a dilemma for the politically liberal. Philosophically he is for the common man, specifically for the government to be aware of the ordinary citizen’s predicament and to effectively respond to it. But to practically accomplish this he must go beyond simply responding to the polls, he must assume leadership; in effect he must become one of the ruling class, if temporarily only. In a real sense he must be at the same time both populist and aristocrat.
One again when dealing with human beings, their behavior and their societies, black and white thinking doesn’t cut it. One must learn to be content with shades of grey.
|
|