People often mistake Peace as the opposite of War. Peace and War are not opposites. War and Peace are complementary. War leads to peace necessarily and peace leads to war necessarily.
The opposite of War is the Rule of Law.
John.
Friday, December 5, 2008
Friday, October 10, 2008
The economy
We often forget that the economy of the United States does not exist in a vacuum. The disaster unfolding is really a crisis of the moral values of our society. A morality that says the solution to everything is to shop. If you feel low, shop......the tough "go shopping"........the solution to terrorism?? SHOP!!!! Morons bursting into stores to "buy stuff." The debt crisis is a moral crisis.
Just as the collapse of the economy has been caused by a collapse in the virtue and morals of the society, that collapse will boomerang back onto the society itself. Social order in this country, for at least 30 years, has been preserved by a nation awash in easy money. That day is dead. Now the wounds and divisions that threatened social order in the late 60s and into the late 70s, culminating in the "Summer of Sam" in NYC, will begin to bleed again. They were cauterized by cheap credit and debt construction.
The artificial "Morning in America", the American Renaissance that so many Conservatives claim credit for (less crime, low taxes, more GDP growth) is about to be proven a fraudulent facade by the reality that something for nothing eventually collapses down to nothing.
John.
Just as the collapse of the economy has been caused by a collapse in the virtue and morals of the society, that collapse will boomerang back onto the society itself. Social order in this country, for at least 30 years, has been preserved by a nation awash in easy money. That day is dead. Now the wounds and divisions that threatened social order in the late 60s and into the late 70s, culminating in the "Summer of Sam" in NYC, will begin to bleed again. They were cauterized by cheap credit and debt construction.
The artificial "Morning in America", the American Renaissance that so many Conservatives claim credit for (less crime, low taxes, more GDP growth) is about to be proven a fraudulent facade by the reality that something for nothing eventually collapses down to nothing.
John.
Tuesday, September 30, 2008
Rally for the Democratic Republic!!
The Liberals and Conservatives who had the courage to stand against the monstrosity of the Bush/Frank Plutocratic bill that almost passed the House are the last vestiges of Congressional power and bravery left standing between American liberty and the Autocratic Plutocracy that appears to be the goal of the "moderates."
Despite catcalls from the financial media it is and has been THEY, the Bush/Frank allies, who have been idiotic, blind and negligent regarding the economy for EIGHT years!!! For that long we have heard the "fundamentals are sound", "housing will always rise", "stocks will always rise" etc etc.... Now, in the last 72 hours or so, these financial wizards have the utter gall and audacity to proclaim that the coming Depression (and it is just beginning) is the fault of the last vestiges of Legislative bravery left who voted down the bill, the last defenders of the Republic. These courageous Men and Women should be held UP, NOT torn down....they will be remembered as the last of those who truly deserve to be called United States Congressman.
Make no mistake about it....the long knives are now out. The Fed, the Banks, Bush/Cheney, The Republican Party, the Democratic Party and the fat and fetid wealthy cow that has been sucking the tit of the government for 100 years is now coalescing in a dirty alliance to destroy the Democratic Republic by blaming the Congress for the coming Depression, the Depression that was created by their own wallowing in the fetid slop of government deals, perks, kickbacks, contracts, tax breaks, and truly historically MASSIVE scandalous and criminal accumulation of debt.
You ask....what is my "solution"?? Here is my solution....good governance. Rally for the Republic. Get back to doing what government was created for.....DEFEND us against the gathering storm of our foreign enemies rapidly combining, conspiring and salivating over our supposed demise, PROTECT the Poor:the truly poor from the massive Depression about to descend upon us. The government must GET OUT of the business of subsidizing the Rich and Middle Class, that is unsustainable and leaves the poor and weak to fend for themselves. We need massive help for the rapidly increasing destitute citizens of this nation, but the government must make huge cuts in subsidies for Middle class and wealthy people and corporations.
Our government didn't get into the massive debt that is destroying us by helping poor people. It got into debt by wedding itself to already powerful people in an unholy alliance of the gold ringed hand of government washing the pink, scrubbed, fat hand of unearned wealth.
God Bless the Honorable Mike Pence, God Bless the Honorable Denis Kucinich, God Bless the Honorable Sheila Jackson Lee, God Bless the Honorable Ron Paul, God Bless Senator Jim Bunning, God Bless Mike Huckabee(the rightful vice-presidential nominee), and God Bless the American People who, at least for today, truly deserve to be called a Free People exercising their sovereign authority over the government. In this country THE PEOPLE ARE THE STATE!! NOT THE GOVERNMENT!! and the State is always supreme over the government.
At least for today I have some faith again that the country I used to believe in might still exist, that free institutions guided by a free constitution in the service of a Free Republic might still be possible. IF and only IF, the courage that the leaders mentioned above and others and of the People persists. The Democratic Republic is kept alive as long as the People DEMAND accountability from government. It is not cynicism that is demanded now but activism.
Now the battle is joined to defend the Republic and the long knives are out to destroy it. Those who guided us into this mess will use the disastrous economy created by them as a weapon to try to destroy Liberty and the Republic. Courage is all that is left to defend it. Get up, stand up, rise up......
John.
Despite catcalls from the financial media it is and has been THEY, the Bush/Frank allies, who have been idiotic, blind and negligent regarding the economy for EIGHT years!!! For that long we have heard the "fundamentals are sound", "housing will always rise", "stocks will always rise" etc etc.... Now, in the last 72 hours or so, these financial wizards have the utter gall and audacity to proclaim that the coming Depression (and it is just beginning) is the fault of the last vestiges of Legislative bravery left who voted down the bill, the last defenders of the Republic. These courageous Men and Women should be held UP, NOT torn down....they will be remembered as the last of those who truly deserve to be called United States Congressman.
Make no mistake about it....the long knives are now out. The Fed, the Banks, Bush/Cheney, The Republican Party, the Democratic Party and the fat and fetid wealthy cow that has been sucking the tit of the government for 100 years is now coalescing in a dirty alliance to destroy the Democratic Republic by blaming the Congress for the coming Depression, the Depression that was created by their own wallowing in the fetid slop of government deals, perks, kickbacks, contracts, tax breaks, and truly historically MASSIVE scandalous and criminal accumulation of debt.
You ask....what is my "solution"?? Here is my solution....good governance. Rally for the Republic. Get back to doing what government was created for.....DEFEND us against the gathering storm of our foreign enemies rapidly combining, conspiring and salivating over our supposed demise, PROTECT the Poor:the truly poor from the massive Depression about to descend upon us. The government must GET OUT of the business of subsidizing the Rich and Middle Class, that is unsustainable and leaves the poor and weak to fend for themselves. We need massive help for the rapidly increasing destitute citizens of this nation, but the government must make huge cuts in subsidies for Middle class and wealthy people and corporations.
Our government didn't get into the massive debt that is destroying us by helping poor people. It got into debt by wedding itself to already powerful people in an unholy alliance of the gold ringed hand of government washing the pink, scrubbed, fat hand of unearned wealth.
God Bless the Honorable Mike Pence, God Bless the Honorable Denis Kucinich, God Bless the Honorable Sheila Jackson Lee, God Bless the Honorable Ron Paul, God Bless Senator Jim Bunning, God Bless Mike Huckabee(the rightful vice-presidential nominee), and God Bless the American People who, at least for today, truly deserve to be called a Free People exercising their sovereign authority over the government. In this country THE PEOPLE ARE THE STATE!! NOT THE GOVERNMENT!! and the State is always supreme over the government.
At least for today I have some faith again that the country I used to believe in might still exist, that free institutions guided by a free constitution in the service of a Free Republic might still be possible. IF and only IF, the courage that the leaders mentioned above and others and of the People persists. The Democratic Republic is kept alive as long as the People DEMAND accountability from government. It is not cynicism that is demanded now but activism.
Now the battle is joined to defend the Republic and the long knives are out to destroy it. Those who guided us into this mess will use the disastrous economy created by them as a weapon to try to destroy Liberty and the Republic. Courage is all that is left to defend it. Get up, stand up, rise up......
John.
Saturday, September 27, 2008
The Debate
Obama won the debate for the most part. McCain was not wiped out and had some moments, but was far too focused on Iraq.
Obama seems to really understand that the focus on Iraq, while tactically a minor victory for the US over the last year, has been a disaster strategically for the US for 5 years. Obama demonstrated this understanding with this line regarding increasing Chinese presence in Latin America,
"China's ubiquitousness in Latin America is overshadowed only by our absence."
Brilliant, straight to the point, and demonstrates an understanding of the current geostrategic situation that I was not aware he had in him. McCain did not comment on China at all, so focused was he on his talking points on the "surge."
Mrs. Palin, care to provide any thoughts regarding China?? "Thenks, buut........noe thenks."
Hope all is well, John.
Obama seems to really understand that the focus on Iraq, while tactically a minor victory for the US over the last year, has been a disaster strategically for the US for 5 years. Obama demonstrated this understanding with this line regarding increasing Chinese presence in Latin America,
"China's ubiquitousness in Latin America is overshadowed only by our absence."
Brilliant, straight to the point, and demonstrates an understanding of the current geostrategic situation that I was not aware he had in him. McCain did not comment on China at all, so focused was he on his talking points on the "surge."
Mrs. Palin, care to provide any thoughts regarding China?? "Thenks, buut........noe thenks."
Hope all is well, John.
Saturday, September 20, 2008
"We Are All Socialists Now"
Today on the Rachel Maddow Show on MSNBC Rachel and Paul Krugman were somewhat gleefully proclaiming that "we are all Socialists now!!" The Left is definitely on the march and feeling its oats. My admonishment is, "be careful what you wish for."
Capitalism and Communism are not opposites. As Marxian philosophical constructs, they are necessities of one another. The initial error of the Communists in 1917 is that they tried to move Russia into Communism before it had ever experienced Capitalism. Therefore, Communism was imposed over an inherently weak semi-feudal system. Commuinism in China in 1949 suffered under similar circumstances.
Communism is not an economic system. It is a system that is anti-economical that can be imposed upon an economy. It is anti-economical in that it attempts to defy all the laws of economics. Embedded within the ideas of Communism are ideas regarding desirable economic outcomes, but it is not systemical in how those outcomes might be reached. Communism allows for many strategies and tactics to achieve itself over the long term. Communism is about the manipulation of human behavior, human culture, and human politics in order to reach economic ends that cannot possibly be reached by a faithfulness to basic economic laws. Capitalism is one such manipulation, or the USE of Capitalism. We cannot understand the age we are living in until we understand this paradox of Communism. Communism is strongest in its pre-economic manifestation, either before it has been implemented or when it is declared "dead". It begins to weaken as soon as it is attempted to be imposed upon an economy.
When understanding the above ideas, it puts what is happening in China, Russia and the US into a clarified perspective. Americans think that the Beijing regime simply pays lip service to Communism but is actually Capitalist. This is incorrect. Capitalism and Communism are not opposites. Capitalism is a specifiic type of economic system. Communism is a much broader idea than an economical one. Capitalism can be used to achieve Communist ends. Through the hard currency generated by controlled Capitalism, the Beijing regime has launched a massive military build-up started in 1987 that dwarfs that seen in Europe pre-World War I.
Understanding events in Russia today is also made more clear when understanding the interconnectedness of Communism and Capitalism. The introduction of "Capitalism" in Russia did not only occur in 1989. Lenin understood the concept with his New Economic Policy or NEP that unleashed controlled Capitalism. This generated much wealth allowing Lenin to consolidate his power over a hostile Russia.
Just as in Russia and China, in the US Capitalism and Communism are not opposites either. A hyper-Capitalist system designed to maximize consumer demand and stimulate consumption above all else can easily lead to Communism or as we like to call it "socialism". This is the way I understand the present idea to socialize the banking sector in the US. In order to stimulate maximum consumption of housing a hybrid quasi governmental system was rigged up called Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to send home ownership and demand for homes to unprecedented heights. It was thought that ownership(Capitalism) could be turned to maximal public good by greasing the wheels with a small amount of government involvement. Capitalism is now metastisizing into socialism/Communism.
None of these domestic issues in China, Russia or the US are isolated from the geopolitical situation that is growing more tense by the hour. Today a "Capitalist Russia" has exported its organized criminals to the United States, and the West in general. Most, if not all, of these criminal structures are controlled by "former" KGB men. When considering that these Russian mafiyas are involved in drug-running, gun running, immigrant smuggling, bank fraud and theft and computer hacking it becomes reminiscent of pre-Revolutionary Russia, in which Lenin's party, the Bolshevik's, used terrorism, bank robbery, and extortion to destabilize the Czarist regime and gain access to enormous amounts of cash.
Today's events resemble a revolution on a global scale, a World Revolution. Terrorism and organized crime were the same tactics used to promote national revolution in the 20th century and today in the 21st they are being used to promote global revolution.
Marx's belief was that only when Capitalism had become global would a global revolution become possible through economic collapse. Lenin devised an accelerated strategy to by-pass the Capitalist stage of Marxian evolution and go right to the Communist stage. He used terrorism and organized crime to push the Revolution forward. Today we see a blending of this Marxist/Leninist strategy across the entire globe. We see a world where global Capitalism is collapsing of its own weight and destabilizing terrorism and geopolitical tensions are expanding at an exponential rate. The collapse has begun. What will rise from the rubble is unknown.
Somehow I think Marx and Lenin would feel right at home in the world today.
John.
Capitalism and Communism are not opposites. As Marxian philosophical constructs, they are necessities of one another. The initial error of the Communists in 1917 is that they tried to move Russia into Communism before it had ever experienced Capitalism. Therefore, Communism was imposed over an inherently weak semi-feudal system. Commuinism in China in 1949 suffered under similar circumstances.
Communism is not an economic system. It is a system that is anti-economical that can be imposed upon an economy. It is anti-economical in that it attempts to defy all the laws of economics. Embedded within the ideas of Communism are ideas regarding desirable economic outcomes, but it is not systemical in how those outcomes might be reached. Communism allows for many strategies and tactics to achieve itself over the long term. Communism is about the manipulation of human behavior, human culture, and human politics in order to reach economic ends that cannot possibly be reached by a faithfulness to basic economic laws. Capitalism is one such manipulation, or the USE of Capitalism. We cannot understand the age we are living in until we understand this paradox of Communism. Communism is strongest in its pre-economic manifestation, either before it has been implemented or when it is declared "dead". It begins to weaken as soon as it is attempted to be imposed upon an economy.
When understanding the above ideas, it puts what is happening in China, Russia and the US into a clarified perspective. Americans think that the Beijing regime simply pays lip service to Communism but is actually Capitalist. This is incorrect. Capitalism and Communism are not opposites. Capitalism is a specifiic type of economic system. Communism is a much broader idea than an economical one. Capitalism can be used to achieve Communist ends. Through the hard currency generated by controlled Capitalism, the Beijing regime has launched a massive military build-up started in 1987 that dwarfs that seen in Europe pre-World War I.
Understanding events in Russia today is also made more clear when understanding the interconnectedness of Communism and Capitalism. The introduction of "Capitalism" in Russia did not only occur in 1989. Lenin understood the concept with his New Economic Policy or NEP that unleashed controlled Capitalism. This generated much wealth allowing Lenin to consolidate his power over a hostile Russia.
Just as in Russia and China, in the US Capitalism and Communism are not opposites either. A hyper-Capitalist system designed to maximize consumer demand and stimulate consumption above all else can easily lead to Communism or as we like to call it "socialism". This is the way I understand the present idea to socialize the banking sector in the US. In order to stimulate maximum consumption of housing a hybrid quasi governmental system was rigged up called Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to send home ownership and demand for homes to unprecedented heights. It was thought that ownership(Capitalism) could be turned to maximal public good by greasing the wheels with a small amount of government involvement. Capitalism is now metastisizing into socialism/Communism.
None of these domestic issues in China, Russia or the US are isolated from the geopolitical situation that is growing more tense by the hour. Today a "Capitalist Russia" has exported its organized criminals to the United States, and the West in general. Most, if not all, of these criminal structures are controlled by "former" KGB men. When considering that these Russian mafiyas are involved in drug-running, gun running, immigrant smuggling, bank fraud and theft and computer hacking it becomes reminiscent of pre-Revolutionary Russia, in which Lenin's party, the Bolshevik's, used terrorism, bank robbery, and extortion to destabilize the Czarist regime and gain access to enormous amounts of cash.
Today's events resemble a revolution on a global scale, a World Revolution. Terrorism and organized crime were the same tactics used to promote national revolution in the 20th century and today in the 21st they are being used to promote global revolution.
Marx's belief was that only when Capitalism had become global would a global revolution become possible through economic collapse. Lenin devised an accelerated strategy to by-pass the Capitalist stage of Marxian evolution and go right to the Communist stage. He used terrorism and organized crime to push the Revolution forward. Today we see a blending of this Marxist/Leninist strategy across the entire globe. We see a world where global Capitalism is collapsing of its own weight and destabilizing terrorism and geopolitical tensions are expanding at an exponential rate. The collapse has begun. What will rise from the rubble is unknown.
Somehow I think Marx and Lenin would feel right at home in the world today.
John.
Friday, September 19, 2008
A Self Evident Truth
The current "plan" to "fix" the financial disaster unfolding before our eyes will end itself in disaster which will compound the disaster it was designed to remedy. The emergency plan might halt the collapse of the banking system temporarily (six weeks at most), but the collapse will simply spill over into another area, probably the US dollar. Therefore, a banking crisis and dollar crisis will manifest themselves.
One cannot solve a problem by avoiding the responsibility of those who are responsible from paying the price and shifting that burden onto the entire economy in the form of endless billions shelled out to cover bad loans. The utter lunacy of the plan is that the US government itself even before any bailout was on the way to needing to be bailed out itself, trillions in debt.
When the government itself needs to be bailed out, who will do the bailing??
John.
One cannot solve a problem by avoiding the responsibility of those who are responsible from paying the price and shifting that burden onto the entire economy in the form of endless billions shelled out to cover bad loans. The utter lunacy of the plan is that the US government itself even before any bailout was on the way to needing to be bailed out itself, trillions in debt.
When the government itself needs to be bailed out, who will do the bailing??
John.
Saturday, September 13, 2008
Emerson
"Great men, great nations, have not been boasters and buffoons, but perceivers of the terror of life, and have manned themselves to face it."
Tuesday, September 9, 2008
McCain's High Point
The current few days is the high point of the campaign for McCain. The poll that had him up by 10 among likely voters simply shows how much polsters are unsure of who will come to vote. The idea that that poll has any reality to it is purely a McCain fantasy.
In the gallup poll, (McCain 50%, Obama 46%) that is about where it was in February and this is right after McCain's convention. The preponderance of events over the next two months will inviteably move the numbers in Obama's favor. This will be Obama 51 McCain 45 or 46. Historically that is a close American election in the modern era since 1896. BTW before 2000 and 2004 there had never been two elections in a row that were less than 5% wins for the winning candidate (that is since 1896, the first election in which both parties morphed into some semblance of their policy positions today) What are the chances that we will have a third in a row?? Not very good because trends in states tend to break in one direction or another after two election cycles. Trends today are breaking left, not right. So....the possibility of McCain winning by more than 5% cannot be dismissed but is highly unlikely.
It is true that since 1992 we are in an era of close elections. However, the stategic circumstances driving this election all favor Obama. The historical trends in the country that exist today causing rifts in cultural outlooks will keep the election relatively close, but in the end the strategic circumstances will not be able to be overcome by McCain. So....Obama by 5 or 6%, a close election by historical standards but a "landslide" compared to recent elections.
Most are giving Palin way too much credit. She is a paper mache candidate. Once she makes one mistake on a major point or issue she will rapidly become a caricature of herself. To be kind, her personality is an acquired taste and she is full of "irrational exhuberance", so to speak, quite literally in judging by her religious views. In the last 3 weeks of any campaign, after the VP debate the VP picks are virtual ghosts and ALL attention is focused back on the top of the ticket. That is when Obama will pull away a little bit, to an 8 or 9 point lead. It will be closer on election day, lets be honest for "cultural" ie racial reasons.
In my opinion the reason McCain has risen is not Palin, Palin is a divisive figure and would not be responsible for such a rise. The reason is McCain. His speech was good. It moved me, a person not inclined to support him (and not to support Barack either). My Dad was crying. The man is an impressive person even if you don't like him. Palin is a silly joke. Obama should laugh her off and simply call her out of her cloistered coccoon of irrationality and imbecility and sappy, snotty retorts and chanllenge her to answer questions and then question McCain's judgement for choosing such a non-entity.
My two cents.
Hope all is well.
John.
In the gallup poll, (McCain 50%, Obama 46%) that is about where it was in February and this is right after McCain's convention. The preponderance of events over the next two months will inviteably move the numbers in Obama's favor. This will be Obama 51 McCain 45 or 46. Historically that is a close American election in the modern era since 1896. BTW before 2000 and 2004 there had never been two elections in a row that were less than 5% wins for the winning candidate (that is since 1896, the first election in which both parties morphed into some semblance of their policy positions today) What are the chances that we will have a third in a row?? Not very good because trends in states tend to break in one direction or another after two election cycles. Trends today are breaking left, not right. So....the possibility of McCain winning by more than 5% cannot be dismissed but is highly unlikely.
It is true that since 1992 we are in an era of close elections. However, the stategic circumstances driving this election all favor Obama. The historical trends in the country that exist today causing rifts in cultural outlooks will keep the election relatively close, but in the end the strategic circumstances will not be able to be overcome by McCain. So....Obama by 5 or 6%, a close election by historical standards but a "landslide" compared to recent elections.
Most are giving Palin way too much credit. She is a paper mache candidate. Once she makes one mistake on a major point or issue she will rapidly become a caricature of herself. To be kind, her personality is an acquired taste and she is full of "irrational exhuberance", so to speak, quite literally in judging by her religious views. In the last 3 weeks of any campaign, after the VP debate the VP picks are virtual ghosts and ALL attention is focused back on the top of the ticket. That is when Obama will pull away a little bit, to an 8 or 9 point lead. It will be closer on election day, lets be honest for "cultural" ie racial reasons.
In my opinion the reason McCain has risen is not Palin, Palin is a divisive figure and would not be responsible for such a rise. The reason is McCain. His speech was good. It moved me, a person not inclined to support him (and not to support Barack either). My Dad was crying. The man is an impressive person even if you don't like him. Palin is a silly joke. Obama should laugh her off and simply call her out of her cloistered coccoon of irrationality and imbecility and sappy, snotty retorts and chanllenge her to answer questions and then question McCain's judgement for choosing such a non-entity.
My two cents.
Hope all is well.
John.
Thursday, September 4, 2008
Crisis for Stocks
The US stock market is approaching a crisis point. Commodity prices are collapsing. The 10-year bond yield is indicating problems coming for stocks. It is now only about 3.74%.
In the next 6 to 8 weeks a serious downward spiral will begin of at least 12to 15% by the end of the year. perhaps more. It will be below 9,000 by January. This will have tumultuous political and geopolitical consequences, and obviously economic consequences.
John.
In the next 6 to 8 weeks a serious downward spiral will begin of at least 12to 15% by the end of the year. perhaps more. It will be below 9,000 by January. This will have tumultuous political and geopolitical consequences, and obviously economic consequences.
John.
Wednesday, September 3, 2008
The Phony Outrage Convention
Both political parties use manufactured "outrage" ginned up by their leadership in order to increase turnout in elections.
The Republicans have now made an entire convention based upon this most childish, ignorant and unfortunately usually effective political tactic.
To be "outraged" over questioning a questionably qualified person for the Vice-Presidency is the height of fake, plastic phony outrage. You have to be a complete ignoramus to be moved by this.
I not only question Palin's ability to be President, I question her ability to be Vice-President, which especially with Cheney has become a critical job. Cheney is now on a critical mission in the Caucasus. Could Palin credibly even think about such a mission??
To be outraged over that question is to question the very reason for a free press in this Republic.
John.
The Republicans have now made an entire convention based upon this most childish, ignorant and unfortunately usually effective political tactic.
To be "outraged" over questioning a questionably qualified person for the Vice-Presidency is the height of fake, plastic phony outrage. You have to be a complete ignoramus to be moved by this.
I not only question Palin's ability to be President, I question her ability to be Vice-President, which especially with Cheney has become a critical job. Cheney is now on a critical mission in the Caucasus. Could Palin credibly even think about such a mission??
To be outraged over that question is to question the very reason for a free press in this Republic.
John.
The Approaching Chaos in Ukraine
The Caucasus chaos will soon spread to Ukraine. The political coalition of President Yushchenko has just broken apart. The Prime Minister, a former Yushchenko ally has broken from him. Yushchenko is the supposedly "pro-Western" President that the Russians tried to poison to death a few years back and succeeded in giving him a horrible acne problem.
The chaos in Ukraine is just beginning, just in time for Cheney's arrival, and at a most convenient time for Russia.
John.
The chaos in Ukraine is just beginning, just in time for Cheney's arrival, and at a most convenient time for Russia.
John.
Sunday, August 31, 2008
In My Beginning Is My End
There is a seamless nature to existence. We divide time into seconds, nanoseconds and the like. But these a just abstractions. All movements, all actions, all existence is one continuous moving whole.
Therefore, is Individualism and individuality of the person a fantasy? Is it just an illusion brought about by circumstances of our brains being bound to our physical bodies, our "bonelockers" as they say in Old English?
NO. Individuality is NOT an illusion. Free will within the individual does exist, as does Freedom as an intrinsic reality in each individual. To say that something is WHOLE is NOT to say that it is uniform or unchangeable. To say that our lives are affected one to another is NOT to say that each one of us has a license upon the life of any of the rest of us.
When a substance is uniform it is generally brittle and breaks easily. But the substance of reality is not uniform. It is individuated into countless entities of living and non-living matter. These individual entities are joined, they overlap, but they are still individuals. They are NOT part of some "universal mind" of cosmic whole bound to serve the "greater good."
Reality has overlaps and seams. It has places that are messy and dirty and non-uniform. That is called Freedom and free-will. Does this serve the "interests of the whole?" In the end, the "interests of the whole" are served by the "happiness" of its individual parts as those parts make up the reality of the whole as opposed to its notional reality.
As this takes us to the end of the thought process it turns us back to the beginning. As one action ends, another begins. As one thought ends, another begins. As one life ends, another begins. This is the essence of the whole and ALSO the life of the individual mind. The really interesting parts of the whole of reality are in the seams that represent our differences. It is in these seams that the mystery of individual genius lies.
It is often said that geniuses have split minds, or personalities. Their genius lies in realizing this and examining the seams or gulfs that divide their minds: living within those spaces, between love and hate, peace and war, sanity and insanity. It is the division in the wholeness of their mind that gives it strength and genius. In the same way, it is the differences in life as they exist in the totality of reality that make life worth living and links the process within our internal minds to the reality of the whole of existence. It is the divisions that individuality creates within reality that gives the wholeness of reality its natural genius, its inherent worth to us as thinking beings. (as an aside, it is also the philosophical and practical justification for a Federal system of government.)
In my beginning is my end. In my end is my beginning.
John.
Therefore, is Individualism and individuality of the person a fantasy? Is it just an illusion brought about by circumstances of our brains being bound to our physical bodies, our "bonelockers" as they say in Old English?
NO. Individuality is NOT an illusion. Free will within the individual does exist, as does Freedom as an intrinsic reality in each individual. To say that something is WHOLE is NOT to say that it is uniform or unchangeable. To say that our lives are affected one to another is NOT to say that each one of us has a license upon the life of any of the rest of us.
When a substance is uniform it is generally brittle and breaks easily. But the substance of reality is not uniform. It is individuated into countless entities of living and non-living matter. These individual entities are joined, they overlap, but they are still individuals. They are NOT part of some "universal mind" of cosmic whole bound to serve the "greater good."
Reality has overlaps and seams. It has places that are messy and dirty and non-uniform. That is called Freedom and free-will. Does this serve the "interests of the whole?" In the end, the "interests of the whole" are served by the "happiness" of its individual parts as those parts make up the reality of the whole as opposed to its notional reality.
As this takes us to the end of the thought process it turns us back to the beginning. As one action ends, another begins. As one thought ends, another begins. As one life ends, another begins. This is the essence of the whole and ALSO the life of the individual mind. The really interesting parts of the whole of reality are in the seams that represent our differences. It is in these seams that the mystery of individual genius lies.
It is often said that geniuses have split minds, or personalities. Their genius lies in realizing this and examining the seams or gulfs that divide their minds: living within those spaces, between love and hate, peace and war, sanity and insanity. It is the division in the wholeness of their mind that gives it strength and genius. In the same way, it is the differences in life as they exist in the totality of reality that make life worth living and links the process within our internal minds to the reality of the whole of existence. It is the divisions that individuality creates within reality that gives the wholeness of reality its natural genius, its inherent worth to us as thinking beings. (as an aside, it is also the philosophical and practical justification for a Federal system of government.)
In my beginning is my end. In my end is my beginning.
John.
Friday, August 29, 2008
Friendship
Never choose a friend on the basis of common opinions. Choose a friend on the basis of common beliefs as to what ideas are important in life. These will be the best and most lasting friendships and will always transcend any opinion that one may have about a given current issue.
John.
John.
New Eyes
"The real journey of discovery lies not in finding new landscapes but in seeing with new eyes."
Marcel Proust
Don't be blinded by political or historical labels attached to historical eras. Look at the politics and history with "new eyes", not as disconnected bits and pieces of events but as continuities. There is far more continuity in history than discontinuity. We cannot escape our past, and those who try condemn future generations to historical blindness. Simply labeling a time in history does not break the seamless connections that link people and events over time. The Romantic Era was affected by the Enlightened Era. Our era is affected by the "Cold War" Era. The patterns of one era don't simply vanish with the onset of another era. No, these patterns often become the unseen instigators of present troubles or triumphs, the currents beneath the waves of change continually buffeting and bobbing us upon the wine-dark seas.
Events flow with one another. Sudden changes are usually illusions. Old patterns tend to reassert themselves over time, just as habits of an individual built over a lifetime. To follow a policy based upon the assumption that sudden changes are permanent is the height of folly and invariably leads to disaster. Look upon the past with new eyes, eyes that see patterns, not random events. Despite the disdain that the modern world holds for seeing patterns, the fact is that patterns are far more prevalent in history and current events than chaos. There are patterns in the lives of individuals, this leads to patterns in social life and in the lives of nations.
Chaos usually is the confusion that exists in your mind, NOT any phenomenon in the outside world. Kant was wrong. The mind is far more susceptible to chaos than is the world. We tend to find Truth complicated and declare its nonexistence, just as we found God complicated and declared His death.
Embrace complications. Look at the world in all its aspects with "new eyes." Don't fall for the easy way of declaring that all is chaotic and unknowable. Dare to see patterns.
John.
Marcel Proust
Don't be blinded by political or historical labels attached to historical eras. Look at the politics and history with "new eyes", not as disconnected bits and pieces of events but as continuities. There is far more continuity in history than discontinuity. We cannot escape our past, and those who try condemn future generations to historical blindness. Simply labeling a time in history does not break the seamless connections that link people and events over time. The Romantic Era was affected by the Enlightened Era. Our era is affected by the "Cold War" Era. The patterns of one era don't simply vanish with the onset of another era. No, these patterns often become the unseen instigators of present troubles or triumphs, the currents beneath the waves of change continually buffeting and bobbing us upon the wine-dark seas.
Events flow with one another. Sudden changes are usually illusions. Old patterns tend to reassert themselves over time, just as habits of an individual built over a lifetime. To follow a policy based upon the assumption that sudden changes are permanent is the height of folly and invariably leads to disaster. Look upon the past with new eyes, eyes that see patterns, not random events. Despite the disdain that the modern world holds for seeing patterns, the fact is that patterns are far more prevalent in history and current events than chaos. There are patterns in the lives of individuals, this leads to patterns in social life and in the lives of nations.
Chaos usually is the confusion that exists in your mind, NOT any phenomenon in the outside world. Kant was wrong. The mind is far more susceptible to chaos than is the world. We tend to find Truth complicated and declare its nonexistence, just as we found God complicated and declared His death.
Embrace complications. Look at the world in all its aspects with "new eyes." Don't fall for the easy way of declaring that all is chaotic and unknowable. Dare to see patterns.
John.
Defeating Obama
I thought Obama's speech was fantastic tonight. It was nationalistic, well-crafted and written and delivered, cerebral AND emotional, soaring AND grounded, confident not arrogant, combative not nasty.
To defeat this gentleman I would say is going to be difficult, my preliminary prediction is McCain 45%, Obama 51%, others 4%
To defeat him one must point out a contradiction in him in that he professes to be for a bottom-up form of politics in America but his rhetoric suggests a top-down form of paternalism. The Left has never understood that their fundamental beliefs presuppose government imposed from a centralized location, from the top down. To implement Barack's policies requires direction from a central location. Progressives and Liberals fail to see that the policies they advocate have a tendency to make grass-roots politics less energetic and effective precisely because the grass-roots will be expecting so much from Washington during his administration.
The challenge for Barack when he is President, as I suspect he will be, will be to stimulate the grass-roots and still implement his programs which are by their nature centralizing. The challenge for McCain is to try to show the contradiction and defeat Obama on that point.
In other words, McCain must point out the contradiction while trying to cover up all of his and the Right's.
A caveat is that the next months will be one's of great social and economic turmoil in the country and tension in the world. Hang on. The overture has just ended, the symphony is beginning.
John.
To defeat this gentleman I would say is going to be difficult, my preliminary prediction is McCain 45%, Obama 51%, others 4%
To defeat him one must point out a contradiction in him in that he professes to be for a bottom-up form of politics in America but his rhetoric suggests a top-down form of paternalism. The Left has never understood that their fundamental beliefs presuppose government imposed from a centralized location, from the top down. To implement Barack's policies requires direction from a central location. Progressives and Liberals fail to see that the policies they advocate have a tendency to make grass-roots politics less energetic and effective precisely because the grass-roots will be expecting so much from Washington during his administration.
The challenge for Barack when he is President, as I suspect he will be, will be to stimulate the grass-roots and still implement his programs which are by their nature centralizing. The challenge for McCain is to try to show the contradiction and defeat Obama on that point.
In other words, McCain must point out the contradiction while trying to cover up all of his and the Right's.
A caveat is that the next months will be one's of great social and economic turmoil in the country and tension in the world. Hang on. The overture has just ended, the symphony is beginning.
John.
Tuesday, August 26, 2008
Analysis of Huntington
Dr. Samuel P. Huntington's provocative and incisive essay, "The Clash of Civilization's?" was perhaps the most influential intellectual response to the challenge of forming a new view of geopolitics and world society following the end of the Cold War and the dual power system that that conflict had formed.
Huntington's thesis was that the source of new conflicts would spring forth from cultural differences, not ideological, religious, or economic as they had in the past.
Using historical analysis, Huntington describes these transformative patterns of conflict. The Westphalian settlement of 1648 that ended the 30 years war brought about states dedicated to the maintenance of absolute monarchs. Conflict between those states led to the rise of national identity and thus to states devoted to the success of the nation. Conflict thus engendered culminated in the carnage of World War I, the Russian Revolution and the rise of the great ideologies of Fascism, Communism, and Liberalism's modern form. States became dedicated and founded upon these ideologies. World War II brought an end to Fascism, at least at the state level. The Cold War brought an end to Communism or more precisely Communism's transformation into autocracy in Russia and China, now led by "former" Communists in the former and "market" Communists in the latter.
Huntington goes on to describe a civilization as the broadest level of cultural identity that people have short of species differentiation. He posits an emerging world order where the conflict is driven by differences between eight civilizations: Western, Confucian, Japanese, Islamic, Hindu, Slavic-Orthodox, Latin American, and African.
Huntington believed that conflicts would occur along the fault lines of culture that separate civilizations from each other. This would happen for six reasons. First, civilizational differences are basic, leading to vast differences in peoples. Secondly, as people communicate more between civilizations, their identification with their own increases as they see the differences. Third, vast economic and social changes are weakening local and national identifications. Regional identities are filling the void. Fourth, as the West is perceived to be dominant, this stimulates competition with other civilizations that wish to keep from falling behind. Fifith, cultural differences are more difficult to bridge than opthers because they are fundamental to a person's identity. Lastly, the economies of civilizations are rapidly integrating within themselves, but not among themselves. Trade wars and protectionism become more prevalent between civilizations than within them.
One of Huntington's most profound points is that Western civilization is different from all the others. Unfortunately many in the West think the opposite of this. They believe other peoples are fundamentally Western or aspire to be. Others civilizations view the West as unique and this draws all the others closer to each other, in opposition to the West. This will potentially create a great deal of conflict as non-Western nations coordinate their actions to confront and oppose the West. Huntington coins this as "the West vs. the rest."
Another important Huntington makes is that even as the rest of the world, to some extent, competes against the West, they also begin to emulate it. Western liberals see this as a sign of hope that Western notions of democracywill move east. Huntington believed that the east will try to modernize, not Westernize. That is to say that the eastern civilizations, the Confucian and Islamic principally, will try to use Western technology and its derivatives in order to serve eastern notions of autocracy and oligarchy, most notably the Chinese Communist Party.
I found much to agree with in Dr. Huntington's broad view of the way the world is transforming geopolitically. THis essay, written in 1993, was expanded into an influential book in 1996. Much that has occured in the fifteen years since Huntington wrote has borne his ideas out.
One might say that for the West in 1993 there were broadly two possible outcomes to Huntington's hypothesis. The optimistic outcome was one of conflict that could be managed by world trade institutions and multilateral organizations such as the G-7/8 and the UN. The pessimistic path is the one that is unfolding under present circumstances this very minute. The multilateral institutions have become sclerotic and powerless. Trade agreements are becoming less popular and therefore harder if not impossible to formulate. Institutions such as the G-8 and the UN security council are hopelessly divided along civilizational lines. The one being the divide between the West and Russia, the other being the divide between the West and a new Russian-Confucian cooperation signified by the friendship treaty signed by Russia and China in 2001. This was implicitly anti-American and, to be honest, probably secretly a military alliance as well.
Huntington wrote of a Confucian-Islamic cooperation. Russia, since 1993, has move decisively and definitively into the cooperation. Moscow has embarked upon a military expansion and has revived many of the aggressive tactics of the Cold War. This cooperation between Russian, Islamic and Confucian worlds has the potential to supplant the West as the dominant civilization of the world. If its leadership has the will to dominate, as I believe it does, and the West resists, as I think it eventually must, a profoundly catastrophic world conflict will occur, perhaps sooner than Western policy makers might be prepared for as most of them have fantasized and dreamed about "one world". As they dreamed, the east planned and seethed.
The situation is not hopeless yet, but the world is moving into a dark valley made darker still with conflict, potential conflict and economic distress. Only by seeing the world as it is and not fantasizing about post-Cold War neo-Conservative "one world" end of history fantasies can disaster be averted. The world will emerge eventually from this dark valley but it will be transformed in ways, for better or ill, that are impossible to predict.
John.
Huntington's thesis was that the source of new conflicts would spring forth from cultural differences, not ideological, religious, or economic as they had in the past.
Using historical analysis, Huntington describes these transformative patterns of conflict. The Westphalian settlement of 1648 that ended the 30 years war brought about states dedicated to the maintenance of absolute monarchs. Conflict between those states led to the rise of national identity and thus to states devoted to the success of the nation. Conflict thus engendered culminated in the carnage of World War I, the Russian Revolution and the rise of the great ideologies of Fascism, Communism, and Liberalism's modern form. States became dedicated and founded upon these ideologies. World War II brought an end to Fascism, at least at the state level. The Cold War brought an end to Communism or more precisely Communism's transformation into autocracy in Russia and China, now led by "former" Communists in the former and "market" Communists in the latter.
Huntington goes on to describe a civilization as the broadest level of cultural identity that people have short of species differentiation. He posits an emerging world order where the conflict is driven by differences between eight civilizations: Western, Confucian, Japanese, Islamic, Hindu, Slavic-Orthodox, Latin American, and African.
Huntington believed that conflicts would occur along the fault lines of culture that separate civilizations from each other. This would happen for six reasons. First, civilizational differences are basic, leading to vast differences in peoples. Secondly, as people communicate more between civilizations, their identification with their own increases as they see the differences. Third, vast economic and social changes are weakening local and national identifications. Regional identities are filling the void. Fourth, as the West is perceived to be dominant, this stimulates competition with other civilizations that wish to keep from falling behind. Fifith, cultural differences are more difficult to bridge than opthers because they are fundamental to a person's identity. Lastly, the economies of civilizations are rapidly integrating within themselves, but not among themselves. Trade wars and protectionism become more prevalent between civilizations than within them.
One of Huntington's most profound points is that Western civilization is different from all the others. Unfortunately many in the West think the opposite of this. They believe other peoples are fundamentally Western or aspire to be. Others civilizations view the West as unique and this draws all the others closer to each other, in opposition to the West. This will potentially create a great deal of conflict as non-Western nations coordinate their actions to confront and oppose the West. Huntington coins this as "the West vs. the rest."
Another important Huntington makes is that even as the rest of the world, to some extent, competes against the West, they also begin to emulate it. Western liberals see this as a sign of hope that Western notions of democracywill move east. Huntington believed that the east will try to modernize, not Westernize. That is to say that the eastern civilizations, the Confucian and Islamic principally, will try to use Western technology and its derivatives in order to serve eastern notions of autocracy and oligarchy, most notably the Chinese Communist Party.
I found much to agree with in Dr. Huntington's broad view of the way the world is transforming geopolitically. THis essay, written in 1993, was expanded into an influential book in 1996. Much that has occured in the fifteen years since Huntington wrote has borne his ideas out.
One might say that for the West in 1993 there were broadly two possible outcomes to Huntington's hypothesis. The optimistic outcome was one of conflict that could be managed by world trade institutions and multilateral organizations such as the G-7/8 and the UN. The pessimistic path is the one that is unfolding under present circumstances this very minute. The multilateral institutions have become sclerotic and powerless. Trade agreements are becoming less popular and therefore harder if not impossible to formulate. Institutions such as the G-8 and the UN security council are hopelessly divided along civilizational lines. The one being the divide between the West and Russia, the other being the divide between the West and a new Russian-Confucian cooperation signified by the friendship treaty signed by Russia and China in 2001. This was implicitly anti-American and, to be honest, probably secretly a military alliance as well.
Huntington wrote of a Confucian-Islamic cooperation. Russia, since 1993, has move decisively and definitively into the cooperation. Moscow has embarked upon a military expansion and has revived many of the aggressive tactics of the Cold War. This cooperation between Russian, Islamic and Confucian worlds has the potential to supplant the West as the dominant civilization of the world. If its leadership has the will to dominate, as I believe it does, and the West resists, as I think it eventually must, a profoundly catastrophic world conflict will occur, perhaps sooner than Western policy makers might be prepared for as most of them have fantasized and dreamed about "one world". As they dreamed, the east planned and seethed.
The situation is not hopeless yet, but the world is moving into a dark valley made darker still with conflict, potential conflict and economic distress. Only by seeing the world as it is and not fantasizing about post-Cold War neo-Conservative "one world" end of history fantasies can disaster be averted. The world will emerge eventually from this dark valley but it will be transformed in ways, for better or ill, that are impossible to predict.
John.
"The Steady Drummer"
On the idle hill of summer
Sleepy with the flow of streams,
Far I hear the steady drummer
Drumming like a noise in dreams.
Far and near and low and louder
On the roads of earth go by,
Dear friends and food for powder,
Soldiers marching all to die......
Far the calling bugles hollo,
High the screaming fife replies,
Gay the files of scarlet follow:
Woman bore me, I will rise.
A.E. Housman 1895
Sleepy with the flow of streams,
Far I hear the steady drummer
Drumming like a noise in dreams.
Far and near and low and louder
On the roads of earth go by,
Dear friends and food for powder,
Soldiers marching all to die......
Far the calling bugles hollo,
High the screaming fife replies,
Gay the files of scarlet follow:
Woman bore me, I will rise.
A.E. Housman 1895
Saturday, August 23, 2008
Memory,Reason and History
In Walker Percy's "A Short Quiz" and Salman Rushdie's "The Broken Mirror" memory is examined as an individual phenomenon and a social phenomenon respectively.
Human memory has been a preoccupation for us since the beginning of the 20th century. The nature of time and space can distort the infallible memory of Man. In the scientific realm Einstein proved that time and space are related. In the philosophic world Henri Bergson postulated that since time and space are non-linear, then so must be memory. Marcel Proust wrote "Remembrance of Times Past" in Paris in 1914, occupying a cork-lined room to keep out the present. Not even the march of Von Moltke's armies bearing down on Paris could divert his memory from those muffins that so reminded him of his mother. The poets have always understood that emotions can distort memory.
Paradoxically the 20th century has been the great age of the present for men of practical affairs. Modern technology has allowed us to "save time" and "increase productivity". Thinking about the past is a waste of time. Thinking about the future is an exercise in futility.
One of the consequences of our preoccupation with the present is our disregard for the past and the future as exhibited by our ignorance of history and massive debt accumulations. Social amnesia is a consequence of mass amnesia. In Percy and Rushdie we see two reasons for this inability to remember the past: first, our nature as individual beings and second our nature as human beings. These intertwined natures and their implications for memory and reason have serious implications for my chosen profession of history.
In "A Short Quiz" we are confronted by the reality of our inability to examine ourselves. The Delphic exhortation, "Know thyself" has proven to be more aspiration than realization. Percy states, "Why is it that in our entire lifetime you will never be able to size yourself up?" The question Percy poses is one that only a human being can ask. However, the problem is not limited to humans. We often forget that human being constitutes two natures; that specific to humans and that specific to all beingness. The problem of knowing ourselves is related to the reality of our individual being. This confines itself not only to the realm of humanity, but to the animal world as well. The animal's eye, including the human animal's, is designed to see the physical world. One can see out but cannot see in. The eye is designed to examine the other, ultimately for self-protection. But no animal has a corresponding sense-organ so well designed to examine oneself. Humans have attempted to find such an organ, be it the head or the heart or a combination. But nothing has ever given us the definitive power to examine the inner mental world as the eye has given us the power to examine the physical world.
Aristotle knew that human being were animals, part of nature. However, he also knew that all animals have one particular characteristic that separates them from the others. For Aristotle, it was Man's ability to reason, to examine, to know that set him apart. To know thyself, for the Greeks, had a dual meaning. It meant to know yourself as an individual and to know yourself as a human being and the characteristics common to other human beings. For the Greeks it was reason, our mind, that was the golden chord by which to know the self. Since reason was the characteristic of humans, the knowing thyself, in both aspects, was the great enterprise of humanity. Our teleological purpose as human animals was to know ourselves through reason.
It is memory, our personal history if you will, that is at the core of this attempt to know. Without memory it is impossible to know ourselves as individuals. Without a collective memory, a history, we cannot know ourselves as a human society. Memory, reason and history are inextricably linked. The problem that both Percy and Rushdie demonstrate is that neither memory nor reason is infallible and one can distort the other. This poses a danger for history in that it rests upon both.
Percy shows how reason can distort memory. He demonstrates how that great perversion of reason, ideology, can prevent us from remembering our true self. By boxing ourselves into various identities be it Conservative, Liberal, Christian, Muslim, etc. we lose sight of the essential eclectic nature of each of our selves. Using our reason to create our identity distorts that identity and our memory of ourselves. Our identity is not a category that can be labeled. It is a category unto itself, our human identity. To categorize it is to distort and diminish it and block out all the memories we have that run counter to the categorical label we assign to ourselves.
So in Percy we see how our memory and therefore our history can be distorted in two related ways: our inability to examine ourselves as individual beings and our individual ability to use reason being so often misapplied into an ideology and perverting our individual memory.
In "The Broken Mirror" Rushdie shows how our collective nature as humans can distort our memory and how this distortion of collective memory can distort collective reasoning. Rushdie writes, "human beings do not perceive things whole; we are not gods but wounded creatures...capable of only fractured perceptions." We are "partial beings." For Rushdie, there is some intrinsic human flaw that prevents us from accurately recovering the past. For Rushdie the definition of memory is the inaccurate, individual interpretation of the past. His view of Human Nature approximates the Christian view of original sin as the original flaw of Man. Our flaw does not cut us off from God so much as it cuts us off from our past. Memory is the imperfect tool used to try to recreate the past, as faith is the tool for the Christian to find God. It is not a tool of accuracy, but a blunt instrument that shatters the past into shards. It is these shards that constitute our memory. Memory is a particular characteristic of humans but it does not give us a vision of the past as a whole but only perspectives on the past. Memory is collective, common to all humans, but within each it is used in ways that define the self and separates us from our fellow man. For Rushdie, the notion of a collective memory is nearly impossible. There are so many individual memories that any collectivity that exists between them would be meaningless. Memory cannot be separated from the individual it belongs to because to do so is to strip memory of its meaning.
The impossibility of collective memory has serious, if not mortal, consequences for any notion of collective reasoning if we accept the notion, as argued above, that memory and reason are inextricably linked. If memory is simply an individual interpretation of the past and not an accurate view of it, then any reasoning about the past that tries to assimilate common human ideas is doomed to failure. Memory and history depend upon reason. Rushdie, it is assumed, would argue that because reason is flawed, stemming from our flawed nature, memory is by definition "flawed", that is to say not designed to accurately reconstruct the past. However, reason also depends upon memory and history. Can we ever come to any reasoned conclusions on anything if all our memories are simply individual interpretations of everything? Rushdie may be right. Perhaps the answer is no.
The realization of this terrifies me. At some point memory and history became perceived as purely individual and subjective and reason became perceived as purely collective. They have been hurtling away from each other ever since. The genius of the Greeks, and of the Western Liberal tradition, was to recognize that memory, reason and history contain individual and collective characteristics. It was possible to come to a collective reasoning through the use of individual memory and possible to achieve collective memory through the use of individual reasoning and vice versa. As a lover of history and future historian, the division of memory and reason has grave implications for the future of history as discipline. History depends upon both memory and reason in order to make any kind of analysis of the past. If they have no relation to one another then history is impossible. It might be, as Michel Foucault thought, simply an ideological construction designed to augment to dominant group's power. I hope this is not true, and still believe that it is not, but truths are often terrible and I am fallible.
We come back to Percy and Rushdie. In "A Short Quiz" memory is examined as an individual phenomenon. Self-knowledge is extremely difficult based upon the individual, separate nature of our being. We are designed, as are all animals, to examine the outside world, not our mental world. Percy shows how the perversion of reason, the constructed and ideological view of the self, can distort reason. In "The Broken Mirror" Rushdie examines memory as a collective phenomenon. The inherent flaw in mankind cancels out any ability to form a collective memory and it becomes individual interpretations of the past. From these it is impossible to come to reasonable conclusions which are by their nature collective, that is: common to all humans.
Perhaps then, we have stumbled upon the reason our current age is obsessed by the present. Memory and reason have been decoupled, the twin pillars upon which history rested. There is no common interpretation of the past. Therefore, any agreement about the efficacy of past actions and ideas that would lead to agreement about the efficacy of future actions and ideas is largely frustrated. Those who proclaim their interest in the present and future while professing dismissal and ignorance of the past have no interest or understanding in either. The present, like Freud's ego, is buffeted between the shoals of the super-ego of the past and the rocks of the id of the future. It is a precarious point upon which society stands on one leg, teetering from the push of a timeless past and the pull of an uncertain future. We hesitate, unsure of which force to succumb to, seeing dangers in both.
Happy weekend, John.
Human memory has been a preoccupation for us since the beginning of the 20th century. The nature of time and space can distort the infallible memory of Man. In the scientific realm Einstein proved that time and space are related. In the philosophic world Henri Bergson postulated that since time and space are non-linear, then so must be memory. Marcel Proust wrote "Remembrance of Times Past" in Paris in 1914, occupying a cork-lined room to keep out the present. Not even the march of Von Moltke's armies bearing down on Paris could divert his memory from those muffins that so reminded him of his mother. The poets have always understood that emotions can distort memory.
Paradoxically the 20th century has been the great age of the present for men of practical affairs. Modern technology has allowed us to "save time" and "increase productivity". Thinking about the past is a waste of time. Thinking about the future is an exercise in futility.
One of the consequences of our preoccupation with the present is our disregard for the past and the future as exhibited by our ignorance of history and massive debt accumulations. Social amnesia is a consequence of mass amnesia. In Percy and Rushdie we see two reasons for this inability to remember the past: first, our nature as individual beings and second our nature as human beings. These intertwined natures and their implications for memory and reason have serious implications for my chosen profession of history.
In "A Short Quiz" we are confronted by the reality of our inability to examine ourselves. The Delphic exhortation, "Know thyself" has proven to be more aspiration than realization. Percy states, "Why is it that in our entire lifetime you will never be able to size yourself up?" The question Percy poses is one that only a human being can ask. However, the problem is not limited to humans. We often forget that human being constitutes two natures; that specific to humans and that specific to all beingness. The problem of knowing ourselves is related to the reality of our individual being. This confines itself not only to the realm of humanity, but to the animal world as well. The animal's eye, including the human animal's, is designed to see the physical world. One can see out but cannot see in. The eye is designed to examine the other, ultimately for self-protection. But no animal has a corresponding sense-organ so well designed to examine oneself. Humans have attempted to find such an organ, be it the head or the heart or a combination. But nothing has ever given us the definitive power to examine the inner mental world as the eye has given us the power to examine the physical world.
Aristotle knew that human being were animals, part of nature. However, he also knew that all animals have one particular characteristic that separates them from the others. For Aristotle, it was Man's ability to reason, to examine, to know that set him apart. To know thyself, for the Greeks, had a dual meaning. It meant to know yourself as an individual and to know yourself as a human being and the characteristics common to other human beings. For the Greeks it was reason, our mind, that was the golden chord by which to know the self. Since reason was the characteristic of humans, the knowing thyself, in both aspects, was the great enterprise of humanity. Our teleological purpose as human animals was to know ourselves through reason.
It is memory, our personal history if you will, that is at the core of this attempt to know. Without memory it is impossible to know ourselves as individuals. Without a collective memory, a history, we cannot know ourselves as a human society. Memory, reason and history are inextricably linked. The problem that both Percy and Rushdie demonstrate is that neither memory nor reason is infallible and one can distort the other. This poses a danger for history in that it rests upon both.
Percy shows how reason can distort memory. He demonstrates how that great perversion of reason, ideology, can prevent us from remembering our true self. By boxing ourselves into various identities be it Conservative, Liberal, Christian, Muslim, etc. we lose sight of the essential eclectic nature of each of our selves. Using our reason to create our identity distorts that identity and our memory of ourselves. Our identity is not a category that can be labeled. It is a category unto itself, our human identity. To categorize it is to distort and diminish it and block out all the memories we have that run counter to the categorical label we assign to ourselves.
So in Percy we see how our memory and therefore our history can be distorted in two related ways: our inability to examine ourselves as individual beings and our individual ability to use reason being so often misapplied into an ideology and perverting our individual memory.
In "The Broken Mirror" Rushdie shows how our collective nature as humans can distort our memory and how this distortion of collective memory can distort collective reasoning. Rushdie writes, "human beings do not perceive things whole; we are not gods but wounded creatures...capable of only fractured perceptions." We are "partial beings." For Rushdie, there is some intrinsic human flaw that prevents us from accurately recovering the past. For Rushdie the definition of memory is the inaccurate, individual interpretation of the past. His view of Human Nature approximates the Christian view of original sin as the original flaw of Man. Our flaw does not cut us off from God so much as it cuts us off from our past. Memory is the imperfect tool used to try to recreate the past, as faith is the tool for the Christian to find God. It is not a tool of accuracy, but a blunt instrument that shatters the past into shards. It is these shards that constitute our memory. Memory is a particular characteristic of humans but it does not give us a vision of the past as a whole but only perspectives on the past. Memory is collective, common to all humans, but within each it is used in ways that define the self and separates us from our fellow man. For Rushdie, the notion of a collective memory is nearly impossible. There are so many individual memories that any collectivity that exists between them would be meaningless. Memory cannot be separated from the individual it belongs to because to do so is to strip memory of its meaning.
The impossibility of collective memory has serious, if not mortal, consequences for any notion of collective reasoning if we accept the notion, as argued above, that memory and reason are inextricably linked. If memory is simply an individual interpretation of the past and not an accurate view of it, then any reasoning about the past that tries to assimilate common human ideas is doomed to failure. Memory and history depend upon reason. Rushdie, it is assumed, would argue that because reason is flawed, stemming from our flawed nature, memory is by definition "flawed", that is to say not designed to accurately reconstruct the past. However, reason also depends upon memory and history. Can we ever come to any reasoned conclusions on anything if all our memories are simply individual interpretations of everything? Rushdie may be right. Perhaps the answer is no.
The realization of this terrifies me. At some point memory and history became perceived as purely individual and subjective and reason became perceived as purely collective. They have been hurtling away from each other ever since. The genius of the Greeks, and of the Western Liberal tradition, was to recognize that memory, reason and history contain individual and collective characteristics. It was possible to come to a collective reasoning through the use of individual memory and possible to achieve collective memory through the use of individual reasoning and vice versa. As a lover of history and future historian, the division of memory and reason has grave implications for the future of history as discipline. History depends upon both memory and reason in order to make any kind of analysis of the past. If they have no relation to one another then history is impossible. It might be, as Michel Foucault thought, simply an ideological construction designed to augment to dominant group's power. I hope this is not true, and still believe that it is not, but truths are often terrible and I am fallible.
We come back to Percy and Rushdie. In "A Short Quiz" memory is examined as an individual phenomenon. Self-knowledge is extremely difficult based upon the individual, separate nature of our being. We are designed, as are all animals, to examine the outside world, not our mental world. Percy shows how the perversion of reason, the constructed and ideological view of the self, can distort reason. In "The Broken Mirror" Rushdie examines memory as a collective phenomenon. The inherent flaw in mankind cancels out any ability to form a collective memory and it becomes individual interpretations of the past. From these it is impossible to come to reasonable conclusions which are by their nature collective, that is: common to all humans.
Perhaps then, we have stumbled upon the reason our current age is obsessed by the present. Memory and reason have been decoupled, the twin pillars upon which history rested. There is no common interpretation of the past. Therefore, any agreement about the efficacy of past actions and ideas that would lead to agreement about the efficacy of future actions and ideas is largely frustrated. Those who proclaim their interest in the present and future while professing dismissal and ignorance of the past have no interest or understanding in either. The present, like Freud's ego, is buffeted between the shoals of the super-ego of the past and the rocks of the id of the future. It is a precarious point upon which society stands on one leg, teetering from the push of a timeless past and the pull of an uncertain future. We hesitate, unsure of which force to succumb to, seeing dangers in both.
Happy weekend, John.
Wednesday, August 20, 2008
provocation
The war in Georgia is more complicated than surface analysis. One can only understand what happened by realizing that Georgia never made a clean break with Moscow in the sense that it had rid itself of elements within its government and intel services whose loyalties lie with Russia not with Georgia. (btw this is true of the entire CIS space and large parts of eastern europe)
The war is real, but some of its elements have a made for television aspect. For instance it just so happens that cameras are around when Russian tanks are rolling over hapless Georgian police, or to film Russians leading away Georgian hostages and American Humvees.
My point is, yes the Russian operation's tactical goal is to establish effective control over Georgia. However, the more important strategic goal, aimed directly at the US and in cooperation with elements of the Georgian government whose loyalty lies with Moscow for various reasons, is to move US policy into a path of confronting Moscow, a confrontation that the US is wholly unprepared for and Moscow is fully prepared for and has been preparing for more than a decade.
My advice, for what its worth (nothing) would be to be conciliatory in public and perhaps in private to try to deceive Moscow, make no overt moves at all in Russia's Eurasian sphere of influence BUT drive like hell to prepare for a major war in the next two years or so in a desperate attempt to deter Moscow so that war will never occur and if god forbid it does we will smash them to pieces. This would involve, among much else, getting out of Iraq, Afghan and modernizing and increasing our strategic forces immediately.
So when some say that the Georgians are partially responsible for provoking the war I say "yes, but which Georgians??" There are double and triple games being played.
As long as we hold together we'll be ok, that's hard in an election year though when our passions are so stirred up we often don't think straight.
John.
The war is real, but some of its elements have a made for television aspect. For instance it just so happens that cameras are around when Russian tanks are rolling over hapless Georgian police, or to film Russians leading away Georgian hostages and American Humvees.
My point is, yes the Russian operation's tactical goal is to establish effective control over Georgia. However, the more important strategic goal, aimed directly at the US and in cooperation with elements of the Georgian government whose loyalty lies with Moscow for various reasons, is to move US policy into a path of confronting Moscow, a confrontation that the US is wholly unprepared for and Moscow is fully prepared for and has been preparing for more than a decade.
My advice, for what its worth (nothing) would be to be conciliatory in public and perhaps in private to try to deceive Moscow, make no overt moves at all in Russia's Eurasian sphere of influence BUT drive like hell to prepare for a major war in the next two years or so in a desperate attempt to deter Moscow so that war will never occur and if god forbid it does we will smash them to pieces. This would involve, among much else, getting out of Iraq, Afghan and modernizing and increasing our strategic forces immediately.
So when some say that the Georgians are partially responsible for provoking the war I say "yes, but which Georgians??" There are double and triple games being played.
As long as we hold together we'll be ok, that's hard in an election year though when our passions are so stirred up we often don't think straight.
John.
Tuesday, August 19, 2008
aug 19th
I don't know why but for years I've always had bad feelings about this date, like something incredibly horrific will happen on this date. Its strange because I have never been superstitious. I remember though as a small child having bad dreams about this date.
John.
John.
Friday, August 15, 2008
Baiting the Bear
One mistake those on the Left often make in regard to Russia is to regard every foreign policy initiative by Russia as a response to something the US is doing. This has been most evident in the debate on the Georgian question. Even if, from a fundamentally legalistic point of view, Russian actions in Georgia are legal and Georgia is not a "perfect democracy"(and these assumptions are dubious, especially the first), that does not mean from a US perspective that we must treat both sides equally.
We must operate in a world in which there is a fundamental inequality between nations in terms of their power and their willingness to wield it in a way that affects the US. Georgia, by any logical, sane analysis, is not a military threat to the US or even to Russia. The idea that because the US has trained some small number of Georgian commandos that that is an "aggressive and threatening policy" against Russia, a continental sized nation of 140 million and armed to the teeth is nonsensical. It baffles why the Left, usually sensitive to small nations in competition with the powerful, is making this argument.
The new Russian policy of "respecting the sovereignty of Georgia but not her territorial integrity" is counter to Russian policy of even 1 week ago, according to the very thoughtful Strobe Talbott. Talbott went on to explain that Russia fundamentally agreed, under Yeltsin, to view the former bounderies of the Socialist Republics of the USSR as International Boundaries. Russia has now apparently shifted that policy and according to Talbott this is a highly provocative and dangerous development that necessitates a reevaluation of US policy toward Russia.
Talbott, a man I've often disagreed with but always respected was, I think, undersecretary of state in the Clinton years.
More on this soon.
John.
We must operate in a world in which there is a fundamental inequality between nations in terms of their power and their willingness to wield it in a way that affects the US. Georgia, by any logical, sane analysis, is not a military threat to the US or even to Russia. The idea that because the US has trained some small number of Georgian commandos that that is an "aggressive and threatening policy" against Russia, a continental sized nation of 140 million and armed to the teeth is nonsensical. It baffles why the Left, usually sensitive to small nations in competition with the powerful, is making this argument.
The new Russian policy of "respecting the sovereignty of Georgia but not her territorial integrity" is counter to Russian policy of even 1 week ago, according to the very thoughtful Strobe Talbott. Talbott went on to explain that Russia fundamentally agreed, under Yeltsin, to view the former bounderies of the Socialist Republics of the USSR as International Boundaries. Russia has now apparently shifted that policy and according to Talbott this is a highly provocative and dangerous development that necessitates a reevaluation of US policy toward Russia.
Talbott, a man I've often disagreed with but always respected was, I think, undersecretary of state in the Clinton years.
John.
Wednesday, August 6, 2008
A Wasted Summer
As usual this blog goes neglected. I've had no time or energy to post anything worthy of reading....which this is not. My time and energy however, are finally building and a stream of writing will come forth soon. I'm sure all one or none of you who read this await with bated breath :)
More soon, John.
More soon, John.
Thursday, June 19, 2008
A Disaster About to Unfold
The next six to nine months will bring much news from the arc of nations stretching from the Caucasus to the Baltic States.
War is brewing in the Caucasus. Russia is moving troops into Georgia's break-away province, still legally part of Georgia. These are called "peacekeepers", however they are warmakers. Azerbajian just anounced a 53% increase in defense spending. The only target of that will be Armenia.
Debt levels in Eastern Europe from Romania, Bulgaria, Czech Republic to Poland, Latvia, Lithuania are at critically high, societal shattering proportions. Far higher even than in the US and Britain (where they are catastrophically high) This debt is linked to banks in Greece, Italy and Switzerland that have driven investment in East Europe. I say "societal shattering" for a reason. Enormous unrest is about to explode in these regions. Outside "peacekeepers" might be needed.
We can now see why Russia suspended its adherence to the CFE Treaty which banned armored forces from operating in Western Russia. The headquarters of those divisions, as Putin already announced, are moving into Western Russia. The forces themselves will soon follow.
More soon, John.
War is brewing in the Caucasus. Russia is moving troops into Georgia's break-away province, still legally part of Georgia. These are called "peacekeepers", however they are warmakers. Azerbajian just anounced a 53% increase in defense spending. The only target of that will be Armenia.
Debt levels in Eastern Europe from Romania, Bulgaria, Czech Republic to Poland, Latvia, Lithuania are at critically high, societal shattering proportions. Far higher even than in the US and Britain (where they are catastrophically high) This debt is linked to banks in Greece, Italy and Switzerland that have driven investment in East Europe. I say "societal shattering" for a reason. Enormous unrest is about to explode in these regions. Outside "peacekeepers" might be needed.
We can now see why Russia suspended its adherence to the CFE Treaty which banned armored forces from operating in Western Russia. The headquarters of those divisions, as Putin already announced, are moving into Western Russia. The forces themselves will soon follow.
More soon, John.
Tuesday, May 13, 2008
The Frustation of Intellectual Life
One of the conundrums of having read quite a bit is that almost everything in my head, every idea, is unoriginal. I heard or read it somewhere else from some other person who probably got it from someone else as well. That is exactly why group-think and group psychology develop. It is easier to think about what others have thought and to think that way than it is to synthesize others' ideas into your own. This is why, for most, reading is so much more pleasant than writing. The opening of the gift is so much grander than figuring out what use you have for it.
I saw Daniel Pipes and William F. Buckley on CSPAN 3 the othwe night from a speech in 2001. Pipes said that every Social Scientist....historian or whatever, secretly or openly wishes to be a natural scientist. They wish to examine things coldly without morality, but social sciences must, in my opinion, incorporate morality.
John.
I saw Daniel Pipes and William F. Buckley on CSPAN 3 the othwe night from a speech in 2001. Pipes said that every Social Scientist....historian or whatever, secretly or openly wishes to be a natural scientist. They wish to examine things coldly without morality, but social sciences must, in my opinion, incorporate morality.
John.
Sunday, April 20, 2008
An Emperor You'd Want to Have a Beer With
Gibbon referring to the Roman Emperor Gallienus (r. 260-268)
"he was master of several curious but useless sciences, a ready orator, an elegant poet, a skillful gardener, an excellent cook, and a most contemptible prince."
"he was master of several curious but useless sciences, a ready orator, an elegant poet, a skillful gardener, an excellent cook, and a most contemptible prince."
Wednesday, April 9, 2008
Conservatism in Crisis
One debate among Conservatives who saw this economic crisis coming over the last 2 years(there were not many, but a few) or so has been whether the crisis would lead to, in general, more support for Conservative economic policies, whatever shambles they are left in after W Bush, or less support.
The answer appears to be more and more obvious that the slow train wreck of economic disaster that is unfolding is being blamed on "Bush's Conservative economic policies." Conservatives are going over the cliff because they have never fully detached themselves from Bush like they did from his father. After that detachment they won the Congress in a landslide in 1994. In this decade they made the opposite decision and hitched to an ineffectual, incompetent failure who was not even a Conservative anyway. Its quite inexplicable.
The horrible truth however, is that in general it is conservative economic policies, in the traditional sense, that are needed to get us out of the crisis, not Bush's policies. Purging debt through spending cuts, finding alternatives to the income tax and decentralizing banking are what is needed. This will not avoid the disaster, that is already happening. But they are the only way to perhaps avert a collapse of the entire economy.
I say that with the knowledge that the problems we are experiencing now will accelerate the demographic crisis that is approaching and the mix will collapse the economy. Therefore, if the current crisis is prolonged through bad policies, we could be facing an economic meltdown as the horrible problems of the present meet the calamitous problems of the near future.
Any way you look at it, Conservatism is in crisis, and for any thoughtful Liberals that is also a crisis because a healthy Conservative movement is needed to keep in check the radical Left.
John.
The answer appears to be more and more obvious that the slow train wreck of economic disaster that is unfolding is being blamed on "Bush's Conservative economic policies." Conservatives are going over the cliff because they have never fully detached themselves from Bush like they did from his father. After that detachment they won the Congress in a landslide in 1994. In this decade they made the opposite decision and hitched to an ineffectual, incompetent failure who was not even a Conservative anyway. Its quite inexplicable.
The horrible truth however, is that in general it is conservative economic policies, in the traditional sense, that are needed to get us out of the crisis, not Bush's policies. Purging debt through spending cuts, finding alternatives to the income tax and decentralizing banking are what is needed. This will not avoid the disaster, that is already happening. But they are the only way to perhaps avert a collapse of the entire economy.
I say that with the knowledge that the problems we are experiencing now will accelerate the demographic crisis that is approaching and the mix will collapse the economy. Therefore, if the current crisis is prolonged through bad policies, we could be facing an economic meltdown as the horrible problems of the present meet the calamitous problems of the near future.
Any way you look at it, Conservatism is in crisis, and for any thoughtful Liberals that is also a crisis because a healthy Conservative movement is needed to keep in check the radical Left.
John.
Saturday, April 5, 2008
Hart Crane
Mine is a world foregone though not yet ended,-
An imagined garden grey with sundered boughs
And broken branches, wistful and unmended,
And mist that is more constant than all vows.
An imagined garden grey with sundered boughs
And broken branches, wistful and unmended,
And mist that is more constant than all vows.
Wednesday, April 2, 2008
The Fallacy of Historical Determinism
We know that history moves in a certain direction, thus guiding humanity's actions down certain paths. We know that we live in the great age of democracy in which every nation, more or less, is being moved toward trade liberalization and individual liberty. We know that technology is one of the great driving forces toward this end.
We know all these things therefore they are false. The moment when we know that history is moving in a certain direction is when we lose the impetus to take direct, individual action to continue events moving in that direction. Therefore, history will begin to move in a contradictory direction to what we thought. There are always others in the world who disagree with us, who are pushing or pulling in the opposite direction. The moment that we believe history is moving in our direction we are lulled into inaction in the mistaken belief that action is no longer necessary to achieve the desired result. Humans will never choose to act if they believe they can gain the same result while remaining inactive. Those who disagree with us will then begin to move history in their direction. Ultimately, they too will become paralyzed by their own ideology and if we keep fighting events will turn in our favor again.
One who says he wants to change the world often forgets that the world might want to have a say in that. There are others in other parts of the world saying they want to change it and they are referring to us. Do we not want a say in the matter, in the question of whether and in what direction??
Historical forces are conceived and created by individuals. "Democracy", "Socialism", "Capitalism", all of these were sets of ideas that began in the minds of individuals. It is when these individuals begin to believe they have discovered the direction history is moving that they stop wanting to move it themselves and stagnation and decadence set in.
John.
We know all these things therefore they are false. The moment when we know that history is moving in a certain direction is when we lose the impetus to take direct, individual action to continue events moving in that direction. Therefore, history will begin to move in a contradictory direction to what we thought. There are always others in the world who disagree with us, who are pushing or pulling in the opposite direction. The moment that we believe history is moving in our direction we are lulled into inaction in the mistaken belief that action is no longer necessary to achieve the desired result. Humans will never choose to act if they believe they can gain the same result while remaining inactive. Those who disagree with us will then begin to move history in their direction. Ultimately, they too will become paralyzed by their own ideology and if we keep fighting events will turn in our favor again.
One who says he wants to change the world often forgets that the world might want to have a say in that. There are others in other parts of the world saying they want to change it and they are referring to us. Do we not want a say in the matter, in the question of whether and in what direction??
Historical forces are conceived and created by individuals. "Democracy", "Socialism", "Capitalism", all of these were sets of ideas that began in the minds of individuals. It is when these individuals begin to believe they have discovered the direction history is moving that they stop wanting to move it themselves and stagnation and decadence set in.
John.
Sunday, March 30, 2008
Cuban government allows cell phone ownership
Does anyone find it ironic that a country that does not allow freedom of speech "grants' Cubans the right to own a cell phone?? Or is it just me?? Its probably just me.
It is telling about Americans when the most you hear out of us is the materialistic argument that Cubans cannot afford cell-phones so the "right" is meaningless. The cell-phones are meaningless without the freedom to say what one wants on them. Is it any surprise that we have forgotten that in this country given the arguments about the Patriot Act and the like??
We have forgotten that the root of our freedoms and our Constitution is not "Capitalism" but political liberty, not greed but virtue. Capitalism, some form of it, is often a consequence of political liberty, not the vice-versa.
I believe some of our economic problems are also caused by this moral and ethical lapse into economic hedonism.
John.
It is telling about Americans when the most you hear out of us is the materialistic argument that Cubans cannot afford cell-phones so the "right" is meaningless. The cell-phones are meaningless without the freedom to say what one wants on them. Is it any surprise that we have forgotten that in this country given the arguments about the Patriot Act and the like??
We have forgotten that the root of our freedoms and our Constitution is not "Capitalism" but political liberty, not greed but virtue. Capitalism, some form of it, is often a consequence of political liberty, not the vice-versa.
I believe some of our economic problems are also caused by this moral and ethical lapse into economic hedonism.
John.
Saturday, March 29, 2008
Don't blame the prez...but why not??
My conservative friends often say you cannot blame the President for the current housing crisis. However, 9/11 was partly due to his administration's negligence. Interest rates were lowered to 1% basically because of 9/11 to keep the economy from collapsing. Sustained 1% rates led to a system awash in easy money. That led to the current crisis.
I know that is simplistic but I think it has some truth and I'm a simple guy anyway. Maybe this is common knowledge but I've never heard this argument made.
John.
I know that is simplistic but I think it has some truth and I'm a simple guy anyway. Maybe this is common knowledge but I've never heard this argument made.
John.
Thursday, March 27, 2008
Tibet
The situation in Tibet is terrible. Tibetans are rightly protesting Chinese oppression even outside of Tibet in the majority Tibetan cities of Szechuan Province and in other parts of the south. Of course we all have to treat the Chinese Communists with kid-gloves....we wouldn't want to offend them or interfere in their internal affairs!!! :(
John
John
Wednesday, March 19, 2008
Been too long
Hope any and all who read this are well and happy. Its been a long time since my last post. I've been depressed and exhausted but still doing quite well. I have no energy to think at the moment. I hate to turn this into one of those personality blogs that I despise that simply talk about the writer so I'll stop here.
More on topics historical and political soon. Obama's speech was brilliant and expressed the dichotomous and conundrum-laden nature of our wonderful country. I still can't vote for him, but I respect him, and in the long run that is far, far more important. And given his seemingly generous spirit I think he would understand that.
Hope you are OK Happy St. Patty's Day!!!
John.
More on topics historical and political soon. Obama's speech was brilliant and expressed the dichotomous and conundrum-laden nature of our wonderful country. I still can't vote for him, but I respect him, and in the long run that is far, far more important. And given his seemingly generous spirit I think he would understand that.
Hope you are OK Happy St. Patty's Day!!!
John.
Wednesday, February 20, 2008
Historical Contexts
For instance, certain types of events occur during times of economic change such as we are experiencing now. Usually, drastic economic change either leads to or is caused by rapid political change. An example of this would be the Roman Empire of the 3rd century between 235 ad and 285 ad, roughly between the end of the Severan dynasty and the reign of Emperor Diocletian. The Empire or Commonwealth (as the Romans called it) began a quite rapid economic decline beginning about 200 AD. The Roman currency coinage was devalued in order to prop up the economy. By 235 the economy was in a shambles.
Rome appeared weak. This attracted her enemies into aggressive actions against her thinking that the risks of war with Rome were less. The "Germans" in the West and the Parthians or Iranians in the East agressively move against the Commonwealth. Between 235 and 285 the entire Meditteranean world was a mass of war and economic chaos. The wars, for Rome, were both against foreign enemies and civil wars.
It was only through severe actions taken by the Roman government, both at home and abroad that some order was restored. But by 300AD Rome was a full-fledged Dictatorship with the Emperor wielding supreme powers. Taxes were raised to the sky. By 325 Rome a Christian theocracy. In 410 Rome was stormed, sacked and burned by maurading barbarians.
This is one example, albeit extreme I admit, of how economic decline can lead to political changes in the world. However, the real root of Rome's economic decline was political in that the government mismanaged the economy beginning around 180 with the death of Marcus Aurelius and the ascension of his corrupt, incompetent son Commodus.
So we might say that the rotts of the decline were political afterall, not economic.
More soon.....
Hope all is well, John.
Rome appeared weak. This attracted her enemies into aggressive actions against her thinking that the risks of war with Rome were less. The "Germans" in the West and the Parthians or Iranians in the East agressively move against the Commonwealth. Between 235 and 285 the entire Meditteranean world was a mass of war and economic chaos. The wars, for Rome, were both against foreign enemies and civil wars.
It was only through severe actions taken by the Roman government, both at home and abroad that some order was restored. But by 300AD Rome was a full-fledged Dictatorship with the Emperor wielding supreme powers. Taxes were raised to the sky. By 325 Rome a Christian theocracy. In 410 Rome was stormed, sacked and burned by maurading barbarians.
This is one example, albeit extreme I admit, of how economic decline can lead to political changes in the world. However, the real root of Rome's economic decline was political in that the government mismanaged the economy beginning around 180 with the death of Marcus Aurelius and the ascension of his corrupt, incompetent son Commodus.
So we might say that the rotts of the decline were political afterall, not economic.
More soon.....
Hope all is well, John.
Saturday, February 9, 2008
History
I often hear, especially from younger people that history "does not predict the future" and so it is meaningless
It is true. History does not predict specific events. History ,when carefully studied, shows the contexts within which certain events occur.
More on this later. Too exhausted.
John.
It is true. History does not predict specific events. History ,when carefully studied, shows the contexts within which certain events occur.
More on this later. Too exhausted.
John.
Thursday, January 31, 2008
Economic Statistics+SB prediction+rating the spouses
Econ stats are bandied about in the modern age like so much garbage. People use them to make arguments for their side of the economic debate.
Many are unaware, however, that the government's way of calculating such basic econ stats like unemployment and GDP have changed drastically over time. Is it no surprise that the changes have almost all led to "higher" GDPs and "lower" unemployment and inflation?
So, whenever you see those comparisons of GDP over time or inflation over time or whatever category, just remember that GDP calculated today is done totally differently and not necessarily more accurately than it was in 1960 or 1970, for instance. For example, today the making of food at fast-food joints like McDonald's is counted as "Manufacturing" when calculating GDP. It sounds funny but it is sad and true. Its really a sign of desperation and there are many examples like that.
My Super Bowl prediction.......Pats 48.....Giants 17. Another boring game in the tradition of many super bowls from the 1980s like Raiders/Redskins, 49ers/Broncos and the like and that great 1994 game 49ers/Chargers.
Now, important political thoughts!!! Rating the presidential spouses on the "hot" factor....from a straight guy's perspective :)
#1 Cindy McCain(gotta admit, I know she's old but flat out gorgeous) #2 Michelle Obama(a little bit tall for my taste, I'm 5'10" and I thinks she's taller than me,but beautiful) #3 Anne Romney(pretty woman and I admire her battle with MS) #4 Bill Clinton(big red noses turn me on!!hehe) #5 Irma Huckabee(or whatever her name is, a kind and gracious lady but, lets just say Wild Bill's big red nose would improve her appearance :)
More soon, hope all is well.
John.
Many are unaware, however, that the government's way of calculating such basic econ stats like unemployment and GDP have changed drastically over time. Is it no surprise that the changes have almost all led to "higher" GDPs and "lower" unemployment and inflation?
So, whenever you see those comparisons of GDP over time or inflation over time or whatever category, just remember that GDP calculated today is done totally differently and not necessarily more accurately than it was in 1960 or 1970, for instance. For example, today the making of food at fast-food joints like McDonald's is counted as "Manufacturing" when calculating GDP. It sounds funny but it is sad and true. Its really a sign of desperation and there are many examples like that.
My Super Bowl prediction.......Pats 48.....Giants 17. Another boring game in the tradition of many super bowls from the 1980s like Raiders/Redskins, 49ers/Broncos and the like and that great 1994 game 49ers/Chargers.
Now, important political thoughts!!! Rating the presidential spouses on the "hot" factor....from a straight guy's perspective :)
#1 Cindy McCain(gotta admit, I know she's old but flat out gorgeous) #2 Michelle Obama(a little bit tall for my taste, I'm 5'10" and I thinks she's taller than me,but beautiful) #3 Anne Romney(pretty woman and I admire her battle with MS) #4 Bill Clinton(big red noses turn me on!!hehe) #5 Irma Huckabee(or whatever her name is, a kind and gracious lady but, lets just say Wild Bill's big red nose would improve her appearance :)
More soon, hope all is well.
John.
Sunday, January 27, 2008
The Economy
Let's see. Nobel Prize Economist Joseph Stiglitz states that we are at the beginning of the most fundamental and profound economic crisis since the 1930s.
BUT!! Jack Welch, self-promoting, viagra-popping, overrated, hubristic former CEO says everyone should "just take a deep breath, we'll be fine."
Hmm....who should I trust the judgement of??
By the way, a great guy to google on the economic situation is Michael Panzer.
Glad to see an Obama win last night but Clinton is still on track to win. It is so ironic to see the Clintons sucking all the vitality and life out of politics.
John.
BUT!! Jack Welch, self-promoting, viagra-popping, overrated, hubristic former CEO says everyone should "just take a deep breath, we'll be fine."
Hmm....who should I trust the judgement of??
By the way, a great guy to google on the economic situation is Michael Panzer.
Glad to see an Obama win last night but Clinton is still on track to win. It is so ironic to see the Clintons sucking all the vitality and life out of politics.
John.
Friday, January 25, 2008
Predictions for demos in SC and a rant
Obama 44%, Clinton 34%, Edwards 20%, 2% to various other candidates.
Hope you have a good weekend. I never have time to write anything substantial here. The internet is the most overrated technology in history. If you think the internet is going to "change the world" see the present situation in Burma. 1988:Monks get heads smashed in, thousands imprisoned................2007:Technophiles and Thomas L. Friedmaniacs, "oh, that won't happen now, governments can't oppress people anymore because of the internet!!" Result in Burma; monks get heads smashed in, thousands imprisoned.
Ultimately, the internet is a far more effective tool for government to oppress people and spy on people, than it is for people to change their government.
John.
Hope you have a good weekend. I never have time to write anything substantial here. The internet is the most overrated technology in history. If you think the internet is going to "change the world" see the present situation in Burma. 1988:Monks get heads smashed in, thousands imprisoned................2007:Technophiles and Thomas L. Friedmaniacs, "oh, that won't happen now, governments can't oppress people anymore because of the internet!!" Result in Burma; monks get heads smashed in, thousands imprisoned.
Ultimately, the internet is a far more effective tool for government to oppress people and spy on people, than it is for people to change their government.
John.
Wednesday, January 23, 2008
Senator Clinton
Senator Clinton was in my hometown of Salinas,CA yesterday courting the latino vote and support from the United Farm Workers Union.
This city is "majority-minority" with about 60% Mexican American in a city of about 150,000.
John.
This city is "majority-minority" with about 60% Mexican American in a city of about 150,000.
John.
Tuesday, January 22, 2008
My first inclination
My first inclination regarding this coming election in November was that it would be a competition between the two most sound-bite oriented phony, false and wooden politicians that were running on both sides. Well, after a brief brush with giddy and irrational optimism following Iowa, I now realize I was right the first time.
Ladies and gentleman prepare yourselves for that exciting night now!!! That rip-roaring debate somewhere around mid-October. Clinton and Romney!!! Yeah!! See which one has memorized their focus group tested sound-bites correctly designed to appeal to single-mothers with daughters between 10-12 whose income is between 15,000 and 15,500 dollars and who take their girls to soccer practice daily and attend church weekly, oh yes...and whose main concern is a dirty bomb going off in Cleveland because they live in Chickenshit, Ohio.
I can't wait. But no results anywhere now will change my mind:Romney versus Clinton....in the end they are the ones backed by their respective parties machines and they are the ones who tell the voters what they want to hear.
The only thing that might throw a wrench in that match-up is the specter of a collapsing economy. Incessant sound-bites are not, to mind, what people want to hear as they see the economy in collapse. Though maybe I'm wrong there too, maybe thats what they want even more in bad times.
John.
Ladies and gentleman prepare yourselves for that exciting night now!!! That rip-roaring debate somewhere around mid-October. Clinton and Romney!!! Yeah!! See which one has memorized their focus group tested sound-bites correctly designed to appeal to single-mothers with daughters between 10-12 whose income is between 15,000 and 15,500 dollars and who take their girls to soccer practice daily and attend church weekly, oh yes...and whose main concern is a dirty bomb going off in Cleveland because they live in Chickenshit, Ohio.
I can't wait. But no results anywhere now will change my mind:Romney versus Clinton....in the end they are the ones backed by their respective parties machines and they are the ones who tell the voters what they want to hear.
The only thing that might throw a wrench in that match-up is the specter of a collapsing economy. Incessant sound-bites are not, to mind, what people want to hear as they see the economy in collapse. Though maybe I'm wrong there too, maybe thats what they want even more in bad times.
John.
Monday, January 21, 2008
What a terrible day
Well, that last post I must have been either stoned or drunk when I made it :) Dumb nicknames, and wildly off the mark guesses!! I was just in a bit of a silly mood and I continue to overestimate Huckabee's appeal. Although, some slight shifts and he might have won SC even though he did not deserve to with that pandering at the end.
Then yesterday, my mom, who has multiple sclerosis, had a seizure and had to go to the hospital. She's doing better now and back home. It was quite disconcerting however, because she had not had a seizure since 2004 I believe. I thought she was at least overcoming that problem but it reared its ugly head again yesterday.
All is better now, I've had no sleep in 24 hours but with coffee and crackers (I love saltene crackers, I didn't mean the racists hehe) I have survived and thrived. In the words of the inimitable Nietschze (which I disagree with) "whatever doesn't kill me will make me stronger"...yeah, right :)
Hope you are well.
John.
Then yesterday, my mom, who has multiple sclerosis, had a seizure and had to go to the hospital. She's doing better now and back home. It was quite disconcerting however, because she had not had a seizure since 2004 I believe. I thought she was at least overcoming that problem but it reared its ugly head again yesterday.
All is better now, I've had no sleep in 24 hours but with coffee and crackers (I love saltene crackers, I didn't mean the racists hehe) I have survived and thrived. In the words of the inimitable Nietschze (which I disagree with) "whatever doesn't kill me will make me stronger"...yeah, right :)
Hope you are well.
John.
Friday, January 18, 2008
More Predictions(uninformed guesses)
Nevada Democratic Caucus: Vulnerable Little Woman 37%, 'Bama 43%,$400 Haircut 20%
SC Rebub Primary: Soldier for Jesus 35%, Philandering Pilot 30%, Polygamist 20%, Prune Faced Fossil 15%
Hope everyone has a good weekend!!
John.
SC Rebub Primary: Soldier for Jesus 35%, Philandering Pilot 30%, Polygamist 20%, Prune Faced Fossil 15%
Hope everyone has a good weekend!!
John.
Thursday, January 17, 2008
The Primacy of Politics
I still believe in the importance of politics. I believe a nation's political culture sets the tone and either fosters or undermines all its other cultures from economic to religious. This is true because we live within a nation governed by a State, and despite the purpoted "death of the state" promulagated in the last 20 years by the historically illiterate, we still live within a State structure. The State has changed forms in the last 50 and 100 years as it did in the 50 and 100 before that, but it is still a State.
A great book to read on this topic of the primacy of Politics in American life is "The Rise of American Democracy:Jefferson to Lincoln" by Sean Wilentz. It is astonishingly interesting and brilliant and shows how the seeds of civil war were embedded in the political structure of the nation from the beginning. And if you are interested in elections it literally has AT LEAST 30 to 40 in depth pages on EVERY American election between 1796 and 1860. It helps on understand how elections have evolved into what they are today.
John.
A great book to read on this topic of the primacy of Politics in American life is "The Rise of American Democracy:Jefferson to Lincoln" by Sean Wilentz. It is astonishingly interesting and brilliant and shows how the seeds of civil war were embedded in the political structure of the nation from the beginning. And if you are interested in elections it literally has AT LEAST 30 to 40 in depth pages on EVERY American election between 1796 and 1860. It helps on understand how elections have evolved into what they are today.
John.
Wednesday, January 16, 2008
Disappointed
I was very disappointed by the results in Michigan and by the Democratic debate. Romney would make a terrible President. In the debate all the spontanaity(sp?) ideas and fun seemed to be soaked out of the 3 candidates overnight. It was more like a 3-way press conference. It felt like a debate in 1996 or some other placid time.
John.
John.
Tuesday, January 15, 2008
Predictions
Here are my predictions for the top 3 finishers in tomorrow's Michigan Republican Primary (this is NOT what I want to happen): Romney 34%;Huckabee 27%; McCain 25%.
Predictions are kind of ridiculous to make, but always fun to make and think about.
John.
Predictions are kind of ridiculous to make, but always fun to make and think about.
John.
hello
Hello, just starting this blog, my name is John. I know a little bit about a little bit of topics, and the rest of it I'll make up.....feel free to make comments of derision or praise......
John.
John.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)