» FBI Raids Senator Currie’s Home, Sees Tacky WallpaperOpen Source » Blog Archive » Iran: Another War Dance? Tags [...]

“There is nothing to fear except the persistent refusal to find out the truth, the persistent refusal to analyze the causes of happenings”. Dorothey Thompson.

Please keep in mind that the concept of “fear” has cross cultural implications because different cultures have different *systems* upon which their own unique brand of “fear” can be generated. An atheist or religious fanatic will have a different definition of “fear” than others. What makes a Russian or Chinese “fearful” does not necessarily make an American “fearful”, and visa versa.

Furthermore, since everyone experiences “fear” I think it is disingenuous to repeatedly use the motif of “fear” just to remind people that it exists. That would be like using the idea of sexual desire to qualify everything one says because all people desire sex.

……

jazzman Says: That is NOT understanding , that is FEAR talking. There is no evidence or crystal ball to predict that or any social outcome.

If you treat that particular quote of mine (the ‘Unless we want to give up our right to dream’ quote), in a vacuum that came at the end of my point to the ‘exclusion’ of the overall context – along with the evidence I sited elsewhere on the Middle East in general and about Saddam Hussein in particular – then I guess you really don’t need me to continue the debate. I will however make one final attempt to raise you from the dead.

“Crystal balls” are not necessary when you have human intelligence, satellites, and other kinds of reconnaissance techniques and forensics to create a total picture. These facts present themselves – they are not as you suggest, “Bogymen”. That is the same as saying evil doesn’t exist. This is a ridiculous claim. (See my other posts on this thread and elsewhere about how Evil is defined). To suggest that we do not nor should not make distinctions between good and evil is the same as saying that Christians were not thrown to the lions. Or, that there was no holocaust. Or, that there were no Nazis occupying France in 1942-44. Revisionism is for the scoundrel and the socially inept. Denying reality doesn’t make it go away. By denying it one aids and abets Evil.

Would you agree, jazzman, that in order for our society to function properly, in the dispensing of liberty and the right to the ownership of property etc, that there must be centurions at the gate to protect who we are and what stand for? You certainly do not understand the roll of the military my friend, nor does it seem that you understand democracy per say. You are not “dreaming the dream”. You are hallucinating and suffering from serious delusions.

Would you admit, for example, that organized crime is a reality? Would you admit that 911 was a reality? Would you admit that people in the world do bad things to other people such as selling children into sexual slavery? Or would you deny this too? ‘Why’ would you deny it?! And how would jazzman tend to these problems if God forbid he were in charge? Do you see how dangerous your line of reasoning is to progress itself and why evil gravitates toward that which is intentionally ignored and swept under the rug?

Re: Even if one were pretending, why would it be dangerous? The concept of danger has FEAR coupled tightly within its connotation.

It would be dangerous when a distinction between reality and fantasy is not made. On the other hand it depends on what your stock and trade is. If you are a fiction writer then it isn’t dangerous. If you are a prosecuting attorney then it is. If you are a garbage collector or driver for FedEx then it doesn’t matter. But if you are a pilot or a probation officer then it does. In general, if the decisions you make in your own life directly affect the lives of others, then the danger level rises. It is all a matter of degree.

When you say “Danger has FEAR coupled tightly within its connotation”, this strikes me as a poorly conceived colloquialism to camouflage your own ignorance. Central to our debate is the contradiction you have created. You do not understand the difference between likelihood and probability on the one hand, and deliberateness and intent on the other. If someone is in “fear” of losing their job it is not the same as being in “danger” of losing it. Wouldn’t you agree? One is essentially irrational or incidental, and the other empirical and factual. Yet for some reason you cloak your intentions with the former. Your polarities are inverted jazzman. When it comes to reality i.e. empiricism and facts and evidence, you are irrational and delusional – or at least you pretend to be. When it comes to philosophy and religion and faith you are a rationalist! LOL, this is not the first time I have encountered the entity that speaks through you – and probably not the last – but I will give you credit for being the most stubborn.

Re: i.e., you understand little or nothing of X, whereas I am an expert

Yes, that’s correct. There are experts in the world and there is nothing you can do about it. Are you automatically offended when someone knows more about something than you do? Why do you reflexively accuse people of being “narrow minded” and having “bogymen” when they know something you don’t? Sort of like when one child teases another with an object he has in his hand that the other does not have. You are accusing others of what you yourself are guilty of: a lack of tolerance of other people’s point of view and knowledge and understanding. If everyone used this strategy we’d still be in caves rubbing sticks together. At this point I don’t even think you are serious. I think you are just trying to impress your friends by living up to some literary agenda you set for yourself.

Re: First of all the “Evil” is your psychological construct. FEAR arises by imagining that it is happening/might happen in one’s primary reality.

Wrong! People kidnap children and sell them into sexual slavery. This is reality! Men in China still to this day kill female babies ‘after’ they are born because they wanted a male baby instead. This is reality, and it is Evil! Hospital workers in Russia tape babies mouths shut so they don’t have to hear them scream. This is reality, and it is Evil! In Pakistan and in some parts of India a man can set his wife on fire and get away with it because he only ‘suspected’ adultery. This is reality, and it is Evil! Jazzman, I know you are kidding when you say that all this is my imagination. If someone put you or someone you loved in a plastic shredder feet first the way Saddam Hussein did to many people, do you think that by the time they got to your knees reality might set in?!

Is organized crime my imagination too? Would you like to give 90% of your paycheck to a guy named Tony? Who the hell do you think prevents Tony from collecting it in the first place? And if you saw someone beating a child in front of you what would you do? Get a new routine jazzman. This one is played out.

Re: I not only choose that it doesn’t exist, it doesn’t exist in my reality and I seriously doubt that it exists in yours outside of your imagination.

That’s the most stupidest thing I ever heard. LOL … you don’t believe in the past tense, do you? Mixing convoluted existentialism with rationalism and Zen? Why don’t you throw in some Philosophical Anarchy while you’re at it? Oh wait my bad – you’ve done that already. You make a wonderful cosmological poet or whatever, but when it comes to the military or the affairs of the state or defining Evil, I think you need to give it a rest before you hurt yourself or someone else.

Re: I only make distinction between what I consider ideal and that which falls short of it.

You remind me of the satanic literature I used to read when I was a teenager. “Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the law”; all the pro-Ãœbermensch and “Will to Power” and anti thou shalt not crowd. Flesh worship, Anton LaVey and narcissism are still big business I see. Say hello to Bacchus for me and tell him to keep his hands off the children. Oops … too late.

Re: I don’t subscribe to relative morals, only Absolute Morals

And that is why you and the “Will to Power” crowd are so dangerous. You just hack your way through life like an epileptic bull in a china shop. Literalism and extremism combined with a lack of subtlety and issues with authority usually add up to not paying the rent on time. The conversation is interesting only to a point. Like Natural Law it does not progress and soon becomes circular and non-productive. Moral absolutists are known for making sharp distinctions between good and evil. I am both a moral absolutist and a moral relativist. It depends on the culture and the context. What you really mean is that you are a moral inconsequentialist – because you don’t give a crap one way or the other.

Re: The military is not an autonomous entity, it does what it does by following someone’s orders, I don’t know where the Malthusian struggle was inferred so it IS a figment of your imagination.

This whole sentence doesn’t make sense, but I’ll respond to the part that does. The Commander In Chief does not invent military strategy and tactics. You are hallucinating. He is briefed by upper military brass on what is going on and how ‘they’ think is the best way to continue, or not to continue. It is true that The Commander In Chief may step in at any time and make critical decisions. You are correct only theoretically, and for the wrong reasons. Key: the situation on the battlefield dictates the overall approach to the conflict. Even the Generals who make the decisions in real time must adhere to what the circumstances on the ground are saying. So when you say “Following someone’s orders”, please understand that there is a much bigger, synergistic picture here than the one you have chosen to filter through your own ego!

Re: The model of any (personal, national or otherwise) competition for resources is Darwinian, outmoded and again, fear-based, the model of cooperation is the appropriate paradigm and the natural order of the universe.

I essentially agree. However, I harbor no illusions that ‘all’ people are altruistic and ready to accept Jesus. There are some truly evil people out there. But you say they are from my imagination. They are “bogymen” – and they don’t actually exist. Give this one up. Even you don’t believe it anymore.

Re: In my reality everything is fair and there is no competition, if I find myself in a situation in which someone wants food off of my plate they are welcome to it. That is my limited response.

You are describing how things ‘should’ be, not how they are. Idealism is not “reality”. It is an escape from or denial of reality. It can also be a way brainstorming ideas that may come to pass in the future. Herein subjective idealism coupled with a rigid and non-negotiable world view is exactly what you have been accusing others of: “narrow mindedness”. Those who do not agree with what you say are “Narrow minded”. You say “That is my limited response”. You walk in-between the raindrops as if being non committal is some kind of a virtue. You know as well as I do that this is a simple matter of feigning ignorance and immaturity.

Are you willing to sacrifice yourself to feed others? I didn’t say “share” so don’t waste your time with it. I said ‘sacrifice’. How much food will you allow them to take, and over what period of time? Would you impose guidelines or would you leave it up to them to stop taking? Key question: would you give your life to feed others? How about this – would you give the lives of other members of your family to feed others?

Obviously these questions are analogous to our debate on the military. This is not about you or I – it is about the well being of America.

Re: More textbook paranoid projection. (Any judgment is by one’s own standards or tacit acceptance of others’ standards.) Whence your need vis-à-vis my observations? Meta-physician, heal thyself!

One does not judge others by one’s own standards. One judges them by theirs. This is the undoing of many a scoundrel. Your quote “A fanatical end justifies the means” – when inserted just for the hell of it – serves as a sort of intoxicating agent for your own intolerance and lack of understanding. It also acts as a buzz phrase in an attempt to bond with like minded individuals of who in the process of coming of age may take you seriously.

Re: Advocating a pre-emptive (fear-based) military incursion into any society no matter how “evil” you believe it to be, for whatever torts you think they may have committed or how FEARFUL you are that they mean you harm, is a sanction of mass murder. War is sanctioned mass murder, sanctioned by anyone who supports it.

You see the whole issue in very black and white terms. Again, it is not about you or I. It is about the collective security of an entire country. This is what you’re not getting. When you say [referring to me] “No matter how evil you believe it to be”, you must understand that military decisions in a modern democracy are not based on sentiment and personal predilection. As I explained before it is based on intelligence gathering. This information creates its own picture and must be interpreted by those who know how to read it. It has nothing to do with what you or I do or do not believe. We do not live in a feudal society and there are no kings here.

……

I don’t believe that you believe half of what you say. You are just putting up a facade; maintaining consistency and streamlining the whole process for your readers. The “Do what thou wilt” and “Will to Power” crowd will love you for it. To me you seem more and more like an accident waiting to happen. It is as if you are being consumed by your own bitterness, and ego. You slash and dash your way through a debate with misplaced clichés and isolated prepositions. Generation-xers and those even younger who make a career out of not having any discipline in their lives must think that your routine is all that.

A good debate is when the participants learn from each other and on occasion acquiesce on certain points. But you deny facts and reality and communicate as if you had all the answers. I tell you that the rent is due and you tell me that there is no such thing as rent. I feel like I’m communicating with an adolescent who doesn’t understand his own mortality. You are an incredible writer, and, a wasted talent. Your prowess is what kept me going for so long. But now, I see who I am dealing with, and I must announce a parting of the ways. Thank you for the exercise. Life calls.

Daniel: BramGolah@gmail.com

As you are fond of stating rc: “To each his own” and I say “rightbackatcha.”

Peace

The military is not an autonomous entity, it does what it does by following someone’s orders, I don’t know where the Malthusian struggle was inferred so it IS a figment of your imagination. The model of any (personal, national or otherwise) competition for resources is Darwinian, outmoded and again, fear-based, the model of cooperation is the appropriate paradigm and the natural order of the universe. In my reality everything is fair and there is no competition, if I find myself in a situation in which someone wants food off of my plate they are welcome to it. That is my limited response.

Actually, from a Military point of view liberals are quite useful in the sense that the enemy is drawn to them ‘first’ because they are the self loathers, and the self centered intellects who think that what they think and feel as ‘individuals’ is somehow – don’t ask me how – more important than the collective security of an entire country. Can you imaging the level of selfishness that is required to ignore such a priority? That is the dark side of liberalism which needs monitoring, I think.

Observe the paranoiac, fearful and ad hominem language: enemy, self-loathers, self-centered, intellects (disparaging use), collective security of an entire country, selfishness required to ignore such a priority, dark side, liberalism, needs monitoring.

This is exactly the kind of (and now this is related to what I said before about judging others by ones own standards – when I said [of the uninformed] ‘they themselves are guilty of the thing they accuse others of’). Does “narrow mindedness” ring a bell?

More textbook paranoid projection. (Any judgment is by one’s own standards or tacit acceptance of others’ standards.)

I need you to really think about your accusations for a few minutes.

Whence your need vis-à-vis my observations? Meta-physician, heal thyself!

Think about “A fanatical end justifies the means”. What makes you think I haven’t thought about that statement? If as you say, you have read my posts here, you’ll recognize that this is a common theme that I have advanced multiple times as it is the basis for practically all human violence that has occurred since humans have existed. A fanatic believes that a desired outcome (in their belief system) warrants any action (including violence) to bring about the desired result.

Think about “Sanction mass murder of those you FEAR would destroy western civilization”.

Advocating a pre-emptive (fear-based) military incursion into any society no matter how “evil” you believe it to be, for whatever torts you think they may have committed or how FEARFUL you are that they mean you harm, is a sanction of mass murder. War is sanctioned mass murder, sanctioned by anyone who supports it.

You are projecting onto me those uninformed thoughts you have about the world. See the “narrow-minded” definitions above (A & B)

You are accusing me of your own lack of understanding and knowledge of a subject. You are accusing me of wanting to kill the demons that you say do not exist. Meanwhile you are the one who has created them.

Again, these are examples of paranoia (I observed that many of your statements demonize others and your reaction to those observations constitutes the classic form of paranoia: Persecution.)

Meanwhile you are the one who has created them. You have your head in the sand my friend. You are only partially conscious. One must first tear down those very things he holds dear before he spends the entirety of his time jumping from one delusion to the next.

I take responsibility for my creations (even for the chimerical Godzilla that has metaphorically run amok at ROS) and beliefs regarding the position of my head, amiability, degree of consciousness, time management and my putative deluded states are further examples of paranoid projection.

You are teaching me more about the ‘why’. I think the ‘why’ part is more about egotism, intellectual dishonesty and selfishness than anything else. I observe, one teaches oneself thru the winnowing of that which comports with preconception. The “why” is a function of whatever you believe it is.

The handle GodzillaVsBambi (along with the accompanying insights) speaks volumes.

Peace

Now I must ask you to respond ‘directly’ to the following question: is being against this kind of Evil “fearful”?

First of all the “Evil” is your psychological construct. FEAR arises by imagining that it is happening/might happen in one’s primary reality. There is no first hand empirical experience of this; there is hearsay. (Correct me if I’m mistaken regarding your China tour.) I believe that all people are well intended but many are misguided by their beliefs and their actions due to those beliefs.

Have you chosen to make the claim that it doesn’t exist? Do not replace the rule with the exception. I have nothing against decent people from these same cultures. Can you no longer make a basic distinction between good and evil? Does all that moral relativism have ya blind and uninsured?

I not only choose that it doesn’t exist, it doesn’t exist in my reality and I seriously doubt that it exists in yours outside of your imagination. I’m not sure what you mean by replacement but if there’s an exception then the rule is in need of adjustment. ALL value judgments are intrinsically neutral and peoples’ beliefs are what charge them. I only make distinction between what I consider ideal and that which falls short of it. I don’t subscribe to relative morals, only Absolute Morals, and I assure you my eyesight is adequate and while I maintain whatever insurance is required by others, (state, lenders, etc.) I am philosophically opposed to the concept of Insurance (see my disquisition on that subject in the Katrina thread.)

Tell me that you choose to ignore it, or that you do not understand it, or that you do understand it but do not approve of it, but please, don’t tell me that it “doesn’t exist”.

It exists solely in the abstract, as a subjunctive or hypothetical event and has no concrete basis unless one manifests it in one’s personal reality.

Age and lack of discomfort with one’s local environment have nothing to do with paranoia; it is a mental construct mainly created by responding to secondary information as if it were primary information. It is identified by irrational fear that others will do them harm and manifests as suspicion, hostility and a conviction that their beliefs in that regard are beyond question (i.e., you understand little or nothing of X, whereas I am an expert.) When you say:

One, we fight Russia not directly but by proxy. Two, they are perpetually involved in covert anti-Western activity: supplying Iran, Syria, and the Chinese with military weaponry and technology. Three, they don’t have a roof over their head and because of that their country is “pizdetz”. Bunch of Mongolian inbred atheist Bastards that they are.

That is textbook paranoia and overtly hostile and fits the “narrow-minded” definition above very well (both A & B.)

When you state that without military intervention (or the threat thereof) that:

Unless we want to give up our right to dream, maintain our lifestyle as we know it, relinquish our status as a superpower, kiss all of our history goodbye: the New Testament, the Old Testament, the birth place of Jesus, plan for our children’s future – speak Russian or Chinese within two generations

That is NOT understanding , that is FEAR talking. There is no evidence or crystal ball to predict that or any social outcome. One can never know what anyone is thinking, I only observe what is written and comment from my vantage. Even if one were pretending, why would it be dangerous? The concept of danger has FEAR coupled tightly within its connotation.

I am old enough and settled enough not to be “paranoid”. I do not “fear the Russians”. I understand them. Please do not pretend that you know what others are thinking. It’s dangerous.

Re: Chinese (to whom you refer as animals

In the context of people who kill female babies ‘after’ they are born because they wanted a male son? Yes, absolutely! In the context of people who tape babies mouths shut so they don’t have to hear them scream in the hospital? Yes, absolutely! In the context of people who sell children into sexual slavery? Yes, absolutely! Now I must ask you to respond ‘directly’ to the following question: is being against this kind of Evil “fearful”? Have you chosen to make the claim that it doesn’t exist? Do not replace the rule with the exception. I have nothing against decent people from these same cultures. Can you no longer make a basic distinction between good and evil? Does all that moral relativism have ya blind and uninsured? Tell me that you choose to ignore it, or that you do not understand it, or that you do understand it but do not approve of it, but please, don’t tell me that it “doesn’t exist”.

Re: Iranians, bogeymen, and any number of other certain to occur events

LOL. Not only do you not understand how and why the Military does what it does, but you have taken the liberty to suggest that a struggle for the planets natural resources is a figment of my imagination. Governments compete for these resources. Some compete fairly, others not. When someone takes food off of your plate there are a limited number of responses. By crude analogy this is what the civilian population does not understand about the Military. Then there’s propaganda. Just because you’ve discovered yours, that doesn’t mean that you have to reject it.

Re: intervening preemptively and that our National Security would be compromised by pacifistic liberal agenda if not squelched by those who have expertise and the will to act precipitously in such affairs.

Actually, from a Military point of view liberals are quite useful in the sense that the enemy is drawn to them ‘first’ because they are the self loathers, and the self centered intellects who think that what they think and feel as ‘individuals’ is somehow – don’t ask me how – more important than the collective security of an entire country. Can you imaging the level of selfishness that is required to ignore such a priority? That is the dark side of liberalism which needs monitoring, I think.

Re: You seem to advocate a fanatical “end justifies the means” approach and would sanction mass murder of those you FEAR would destroy western civilization if given the proverbial camel’s nose.

This is exactly the kind of (and now this is related to what I said before about judging others by ones own standards – when I said [of the uninformed] ‘they themselves are guilty of the thing they accuse others of’). Does “narrow mindedness” ring a bell? I need you to really think about your accusations for a few minutes. Think about “A fanatical end justifies the means”. Think about “Sanction mass murder of those you FEAR would destroy western civilization”. You are projecting onto me those uninformed thoughts you have about the world. You are accusing me of your own lack of understanding and knowledge of a subject. You are accusing me of wanting to kill the demons that you say do not exist. Meanwhile you are the one who has created them. You have your head in the sand my friend. You are only partially conscious. One must first tear down those very things he holds dear before he spends the entirety of his time jumping from one delusion to the next. I am indeed learning from you and I thank you for that. You are teaching me more about the ‘why’. I think the ‘why’ part is more about egotism, intellectual dishonesty and selfishness than anything else.

Dan

By the same token with the same respect I give ALL life, the double oxymoron of poetic prose and military intelligence notwithstanding, your writing betrays a certain paranoia and FEAR. Fear of the Russians, Chinese (to whom you refer as animals – kind of an Aryan untermenschen sobriquet,) Iranians, bogeymen, and any number of other certain to occur events that you fear would transpire if the nation’s guard is not on high alert 24/7 or intervening preemptively and that our National Security would be compromised by pacifistic liberal agenda if not squelched by those who have expertise and the will to act precipitously in such affairs. You seem to advocate a fanatical “end justifies the means” approach and would sanction mass murder of those you FEAR would destroy western civilization if given the proverbial camel’s nose. Just because I have a penchant for physics and meta-physics and philosophy, ad hominem characterizations are as invalid as any other fallacy. Specialization is for those who cannot multitask.

Peace to ALL (even the FEARFUL)

When people accuse others of being “narrow minded” it is most often a reflection of one or two things. A: a lack of understanding of the subject. Or, B: they themselves are guilty of the thing they are accusing others of. Sometimes it is both. I enjoy reading your writing on metaphysics or science – or perhaps we can say your metaphysics of science and the Universe. It reads like poetry. Very nice. On the other hand, if my hard drive is broken I do not call a plumber. If I need to resole a pair of old boots I don’t go to someone with a law degree. By the same token, and with the greatest amount of respect intended, it simply does not make sense to take seriously someone who applies the same poetic prose to military intelligence as they do to cosmological protestations and string theory. Poetry and existentialism has nothing to do with National Security.

Dan