Tuesday, January 24, 2006
NO GOING BACK
Neo-neocon has posted many times about her own journey of the mind from liberal to neocon and has become interested in the entire psychological process of the political "changer":
No, indeed. How can you keep them down on the commune after they've seen the truth?
It seems to go like this: an idealistic and intelligent person, who reads a lot and thinks a lot, falls in with leftist beliefs, usually as a university student. But this person never abandons his/her ability to think critically. At some later point the evidence starts challenging his/her worldview.
Because that worldview is so deeply held, the first challenges are successfully resisted. Then, growing experiences add to the doubt, and the pressure builds to the point where it just can't be denied. The person then makes tentative statements to that effect: initially, perhaps, just among friends; ultimately, in public.
The angry and dismissive reaction on the part of former colleagues and friends is always--always--a surprise; one might even say, a shock. And this experience takes on a life of its own by underlining all the previous doubts. If those colleagues can't even listen to the questions and doubts of a former friend and fellow-traveler, how open-minded can they be? The essentially closed nature of such a belief system--the heretofore discussed "circle dance"--becomes clear to the changer-in-the-making. And, once that line has been crossed, there does not appear to be any turning back.
No, indeed. How can you keep them down on the commune after they've seen the truth?
Viva La Revolucion !
Apparently, Cuba is falling apart (no surprise for me). The question on everyone's mind is whether it will collapse before or after its aging revolutionaly leader/dictator does:
Maybe Hugo will bail them out like the old Soviet Union used to do. Who knows? Who cares? The demise of this tropical communist paradise will be exactly like the end of all the other. The dustbin of history eagerly awaits the detritis from Castro's little revolutionary hell-hole.
Workers of the world, rise up! You have nothing to lose but those oppressive marxist thugs who promised you everything, but have sucked away all your liberty, your wealth, and your pride. Get rid of the oppressors who have brought you only poverty and misery and give capitalism, freedom, and democracy a try.
I think you'll like it.
Viva La Revolucion!
Mr. Castro recently went public about Cuban corruption so massive that it could destroy his so-called revolution. And going to the extremes that he did to save his 47-year-old stranglehold, his dictatorship looks like it's ready for the hospice, morphine drip, crematorium and dustbin of history.
Reading from his scripted speech in November, Castro asked, "Do you believe that this revolutionary socialist process can fall apart, or not? This revolution can destroy itself. We can destroy ourselves, and it would be our fault," according to the People's Weekly World Newspaper.
Can't hang this on Uncle Sam.
Maybe Hugo will bail them out like the old Soviet Union used to do. Who knows? Who cares? The demise of this tropical communist paradise will be exactly like the end of all the other. The dustbin of history eagerly awaits the detritis from Castro's little revolutionary hell-hole.
Workers of the world, rise up! You have nothing to lose but those oppressive marxist thugs who promised you everything, but have sucked away all your liberty, your wealth, and your pride. Get rid of the oppressors who have brought you only poverty and misery and give capitalism, freedom, and democracy a try.
I think you'll like it.
Viva La Revolucion!
Monday, January 23, 2006
A COLLECTION OF DR. SANITY'S SONG PARODIES
For your enjoyment convenience, I have decided to put all of my song parodies into one giant post. Some of the parodies are good and some are quite awful, but all of them arguably demonstrate a side of myself that is...well, pretty weird; and almost certainly indicative of some kind of personality abnormality!
It all goes back to my mother (who was quite a talented musician) telling me I had no musical talent when I was 10 years old. I simply refused to believe her assessment--despite all evidence to the contrary. Years and years of therapy later, I still suffer from the [usually harmless] delusion that I am musical and artistic. These parodies demonstrate otherwise, I'm sorry to say.
All the songs were deliberately and shamelessly ripped off for political purposes. I have them listed in chronological order, with the most recent first.
John Kerry - The Lyin' King - "I Just Can't Wait To Be King" (from Disney's The Lion King)
"Not Getting Better (Ever)" (It's Getting Better by The Beatles)
Christmas Wars: A Ceremony of Carols
The New Democratic Theme Song: "I Moan and Whine" (I Walk the Line by Johnny Cash)
"The Name of Plame Makes Everyone Insane" (The Rain in Spain from My Fair Lady)
"Wouldn't It Be Loverly - A Psychiatrist's Lament" (also from My Fair Lady)
"Don't Let It Be" (Let it Be by The Beatles)
"Slogans and Dust" (Diamonds and Rust by Joan Baez)
"The Pirates of the UN"-including "I Am the Very Model of A Secretary General" and "Kofi Annan, Will You Please Go NOW!" (The former is from Gilbert & Sullivan's I am the very model of a modern major general; the latter from Dr. Seuss -Marvin K. Mooney, will you please go NOW!)
"Ask Your Imam" (Stand By Your Man by Tammy Wynette)
"West Bank Story" (Gee, Officer Krupke from West Side Story)
"Blowing in the Sand" (Blowing in the Wind by Peter, Paul and Mary)
"A Prayer For Zarqawi" (Now I Lay Me Down To Sleep)
"Imagine That!" (Imagine by John Lennon)
"Goodbye, Kofi Annan" (Goodbye Yellow Brick Road by Elton John)
"Three Little Lefty Blogs" (Three Little Maids from The Mikado by G&S)
Juan Cole- "I'm on the Faculty" (I'm a Lumberjack by Monty Python)
50 Ways to Force Regime Change (50 Ways to Leave Your Lover by Paul Simon)
The Great UN Pretender (The Great Pretender by Buck Ram)
American Pie - The Democrat Version (American Pie by Don McLean)
Come Back When You Grow Up Girl (Maureen Dowd) (from the song of the same name by Bobby Vee)
Delicious Blasphemy (The Taliban Rag) (The Vatican Rag by Tom Lehrer)
It all goes back to my mother (who was quite a talented musician) telling me I had no musical talent when I was 10 years old. I simply refused to believe her assessment--despite all evidence to the contrary. Years and years of therapy later, I still suffer from the [usually harmless] delusion that I am musical and artistic. These parodies demonstrate otherwise, I'm sorry to say.
All the songs were deliberately and shamelessly ripped off for political purposes. I have them listed in chronological order, with the most recent first.
John Kerry - The Lyin' King - "I Just Can't Wait To Be King" (from Disney's The Lion King)
"Not Getting Better (Ever)" (It's Getting Better by The Beatles)
Christmas Wars: A Ceremony of Carols
The New Democratic Theme Song: "I Moan and Whine" (I Walk the Line by Johnny Cash)
"The Name of Plame Makes Everyone Insane" (The Rain in Spain from My Fair Lady)
"Wouldn't It Be Loverly - A Psychiatrist's Lament" (also from My Fair Lady)
"Don't Let It Be" (Let it Be by The Beatles)
"Slogans and Dust" (Diamonds and Rust by Joan Baez)
"The Pirates of the UN"-including "I Am the Very Model of A Secretary General" and "Kofi Annan, Will You Please Go NOW!" (The former is from Gilbert & Sullivan's I am the very model of a modern major general; the latter from Dr. Seuss -Marvin K. Mooney, will you please go NOW!)
"Ask Your Imam" (Stand By Your Man by Tammy Wynette)
"West Bank Story" (Gee, Officer Krupke from West Side Story)
"Blowing in the Sand" (Blowing in the Wind by Peter, Paul and Mary)
"A Prayer For Zarqawi" (Now I Lay Me Down To Sleep)
"Imagine That!" (Imagine by John Lennon)
"Goodbye, Kofi Annan" (Goodbye Yellow Brick Road by Elton John)
"Three Little Lefty Blogs" (Three Little Maids from The Mikado by G&S)
Juan Cole- "I'm on the Faculty" (I'm a Lumberjack by Monty Python)
50 Ways to Force Regime Change (50 Ways to Leave Your Lover by Paul Simon)
The Great UN Pretender (The Great Pretender by Buck Ram)
American Pie - The Democrat Version (American Pie by Don McLean)
Come Back When You Grow Up Girl (Maureen Dowd) (from the song of the same name by Bobby Vee)
Delicious Blasphemy (The Taliban Rag) (The Vatican Rag by Tom Lehrer)
CONDI DECLARES WAR
This seems good, considering the way that career bureaucrats have been standing in the way of any change at the dysfunctional State Department:
Read it all. Maybe when Condi is done at State, she can swing over and help whip the CIA into shape too.
In other news on the Condi front, Shelby Steele has a blistering takedown of Hillary, who is very afraid of Rice, and hence has started to pander to the Black vote:
Steele contends that blacks should consider this simple fact:
Steele calls it "valuing blacks only for their sense of grievance." I have phrased it differently in previous posts as actively being invested in promoting the victimhood of blacks (as well as other groups).
The nurturing of black victimhood grievances requires that blacks remain helpless victims so that the Democrats (the party of the "oppressed") can continue to be their champions. It explains why Democrats (and the Left in general) are actively hostile to successful blacks like Rice, Powell, and Thomas and have no problem whatsoever in demeaning and insulting them.
For the Left, every successful black person who does not buy into their victimhood cult is a serious threat.
Condi is definitely a serious threat to Hillary and to every Democrat with his or her sights on the White House-- especially if blacks open their eyes and realize which party really symbolizes "the plantation."
UPDATE: Gates of Vienna has more on the subject of Hillary's pandering.
But I think it is the other way around--Hillary is really the "anti-Rice". Dr. Rice has something positive to offer this country and she is the original--not the derivative.
In a speech at Georgetown University's School of Foreign Service, where students are deformed into diplomats, Condi cancelled the tea party. Her message was revolutionary and essential. As a result, she may go down in history as the SecState most hated by Foggy Bottom bureaucrats.
Here's what "Killjoy Condi" had to say:
* Diplomats can no longer build careers by hiding behind desks in comfy capitals. They'll have to accept dangerous assignments and serve in hardship posts; develop regional expertise in at least two areas; and speak at least two relevant foreign languages (French waiters need not apply). That ain't going to make Rice popular with diplos accustomed to rotating between Rome and Northwest D.C. on their way to ambassadorships. Yet, it's vital if we're going to convert our failed, 19th-century- model State Department into a useful tool for the 21st century.
* Ouch! Condi really put Paris and Berlin in their places — pointedly noting that "we have nearly the same number of State Department personnel in Germany, a country of 82 million people, that we have in India, a country of 1 billion people." Cancel that order for the big schnitzel, Mr. Ambassador. You're going to be eating some development vindaloo. (Delicious, too, that la Rice smacked down Old Europe just as Jacques Chirac threatened to hurl nukes at terrorists to prove that France remains relevant.)
Read it all. Maybe when Condi is done at State, she can swing over and help whip the CIA into shape too.
In other news on the Condi front, Shelby Steele has a blistering takedown of Hillary, who is very afraid of Rice, and hence has started to pander to the Black vote:
When political pandering goes awry, it calls you a name. On an emotional level, many blacks will hear Hillary's remark as follows: "I say Republicans run the House like a plantation because I am speaking to Negroes--the wretched of the earth, a slave people--who will surely know all about plantations." Is this a tin ear or a Freudian slip, blacks will wonder? Does she really see us as she projects us--as a people so backward that our support can be won with a simple plantation reference, and the implication that Republicans are racist? Quite possibly so, since no apology has been forthcoming.
Steele contends that blacks should consider this simple fact:
[...]because Republicans cannot easily pander to black grievance, they have no need to value blacks only for their sense of grievance. Unlike Democrats, they can celebrate what is positive and constructive in minority life without losing power. The dilemma for Democrats, liberals and the civil rights establishment is that they become redundant and lose power the instant blacks move beyond grievance and begin to succeed by dint of their own hard work. So they persecute such blacks, attack their credibility as blacks, just as they pander to blacks who define their political relationship to America through grievance. Republicans are generally freer of the political bigotry by which the left either panders to or persecutes black Americans.
No one on the current political scene better embodies this Republican advantage than the current secretary of state, Condoleezza Rice. The archetype that Ms. Rice represents is "overcoming" rather than grievance.
Steele calls it "valuing blacks only for their sense of grievance." I have phrased it differently in previous posts as actively being invested in promoting the victimhood of blacks (as well as other groups).
The nurturing of black victimhood grievances requires that blacks remain helpless victims so that the Democrats (the party of the "oppressed") can continue to be their champions. It explains why Democrats (and the Left in general) are actively hostile to successful blacks like Rice, Powell, and Thomas and have no problem whatsoever in demeaning and insulting them.
For the Left, every successful black person who does not buy into their victimhood cult is a serious threat.
Condi is definitely a serious threat to Hillary and to every Democrat with his or her sights on the White House-- especially if blacks open their eyes and realize which party really symbolizes "the plantation."
UPDATE: Gates of Vienna has more on the subject of Hillary's pandering.
Imagine Dr. Rice using “the plantation” metaphor in a speech. Won’t compute, will it? No grievances, just accomplishments. Thus, if Dr. Rice wanted to serve her party, but didn’t want to run for office, all she would need to do is dog Hillary on the campaign trail. She is the anti-Hillary, and there is no worse fate for a politician than to have his or her antithesis following along behind her.
But I think it is the other way around--Hillary is really the "anti-Rice". Dr. Rice has something positive to offer this country and she is the original--not the derivative.
Trouble in Paradise?
Seems he's not as popular at home as you might think considering he's a darling of the lunatic left and is taking the Venezuelan people toward one of those communist "paradises" --i.e., like Cuba
Meanwhile, Lech Walesa, a former resident of a communist "paradise" discussed freedom with some Cuban dissidents.
Mr. Castro and Mr. Chavez are not happydictators campers.
Meanwhile, Lech Walesa, a former resident of a communist "paradise" discussed freedom with some Cuban dissidents.
Mr. Castro and Mr. Chavez are not happy
Flying High
The Strata-Sphere has a number of stories related to the NSA surveillance issue. AJ Strata has been all over this from the beginning and has done some great work in analyzing the available information. Just keep scrolling down!
Also, Camp Katrina , a great milblog has added a cool new daily feature to help you find all the news you need about our military saving lives here and around the world.
The new 2006 Weapons Cache Databank, updated daily, now gives you the ability to check out a current list of every bomb and gun our military takes out of terrorist hands. You can check out the databank here.
Also, Camp Katrina , a great milblog has added a cool new daily feature to help you find all the news you need about our military saving lives here and around the world.
The new 2006 Weapons Cache Databank, updated daily, now gives you the ability to check out a current list of every bomb and gun our military takes out of terrorist hands. You can check out the databank here.
Sunday, January 22, 2006
Deborah Howell, Welcome to OUR World
Pity poor ombudsman Howell of the Washington Post. In posting a column that took Republicans to task for the Abramoff scandal, she dared to mention that Democrats also received money from the cursed lobbyist. The result?
Well, Ms. Howell, welcome to OUR world.
As a blogger on the right side of the political spectrum, I have been receiving obscene email and comments from your side on a daily basis for more than a year -- ever since I started blogging in fact.
You think you got hate? Try reading my email inbox for a week or two. I am accused of the most disgusting behavior; called the most unprintable names; and impugned with motives that are far more likely to originate with my detractors who wouldn't understand the concept of "projection" if it fell on them like a 16-ton weight.
This, Ms. Howell, is the "reality-based" community. Their reality, sadly, is often the gutter.
This is the community that whines most about "free speech" and accuses everyone who disagrees with them of limiting their rights--as they actively seek to shut you up. They will now use you as the example they have been searching for to demonstrate the "conservative" bias of the media--simply because you dared to suggest that they are not perfect.
You have crossed the line, Ms. Howell, and you will never be allowed to go back. If you want to check on the reality of what I say, you could easily ask Condi Rice, Colin Powell or Tammy Bruce. They crossed the line when they "betrayed" their race and/or gender by daring to have thoughts of their own and disagreeing with the Democratic Party and the Left's victimhood cult.
Most of the authors of the email missives that I receive are hardly capable of coherent thought, let alone an appreciation of reality. They seem to feel that a good argument without the swearing and ad hominem attacks-- is insufficiently caring and compassionate. Often they want to demonstrate their caring and compassion by wishing me dead. This is their idea of what it means to rationally argue their case.
You see, Ms. Howell, you went too far. You hurt their feelings. That is unforgivable.
If you haven't noticed, Ms. Howell, this does not happen much when you point out the inconsistencies or hypocrisies of the Right. Of course, there are despicable people on both sides of the political spectrum who do not feel that they should have to resort to reason and logic to justify their "arguments". Who simply direct all the vitriol and vomit within whenever you question their ideology. But I think you will find that, on the whole and compared with the Left, the Right is a paragon of virtue in this area.
At least we have not completely abandoned reality and truth; and we don't suffer from the symptoms of some new form of PTSD when someone disagrees with us--or even dislikes us. But then again, we aren't the ones festering with a hatred so profound and fundamental that it sickens the soul and distorts all thought.
Have a nice day! And, oh yes. I am eagerly anticipating their rational and well-articulated response to this post.
Nothing in my 50-year career prepared me for the thousands of flaming e-mails I got last week over my last column, e-mails so abusive and many so obscene that part of The Post's Web site was shut down.
Well, Ms. Howell, welcome to OUR world.
As a blogger on the right side of the political spectrum, I have been receiving obscene email and comments from your side on a daily basis for more than a year -- ever since I started blogging in fact.
You think you got hate? Try reading my email inbox for a week or two. I am accused of the most disgusting behavior; called the most unprintable names; and impugned with motives that are far more likely to originate with my detractors who wouldn't understand the concept of "projection" if it fell on them like a 16-ton weight.
This, Ms. Howell, is the "reality-based" community. Their reality, sadly, is often the gutter.
This is the community that whines most about "free speech" and accuses everyone who disagrees with them of limiting their rights--as they actively seek to shut you up. They will now use you as the example they have been searching for to demonstrate the "conservative" bias of the media--simply because you dared to suggest that they are not perfect.
You have crossed the line, Ms. Howell, and you will never be allowed to go back. If you want to check on the reality of what I say, you could easily ask Condi Rice, Colin Powell or Tammy Bruce. They crossed the line when they "betrayed" their race and/or gender by daring to have thoughts of their own and disagreeing with the Democratic Party and the Left's victimhood cult.
Most of the authors of the email missives that I receive are hardly capable of coherent thought, let alone an appreciation of reality. They seem to feel that a good argument without the swearing and ad hominem attacks-- is insufficiently caring and compassionate. Often they want to demonstrate their caring and compassion by wishing me dead. This is their idea of what it means to rationally argue their case.
You see, Ms. Howell, you went too far. You hurt their feelings. That is unforgivable.
If you haven't noticed, Ms. Howell, this does not happen much when you point out the inconsistencies or hypocrisies of the Right. Of course, there are despicable people on both sides of the political spectrum who do not feel that they should have to resort to reason and logic to justify their "arguments". Who simply direct all the vitriol and vomit within whenever you question their ideology. But I think you will find that, on the whole and compared with the Left, the Right is a paragon of virtue in this area.
At least we have not completely abandoned reality and truth; and we don't suffer from the symptoms of some new form of PTSD when someone disagrees with us--or even dislikes us. But then again, we aren't the ones festering with a hatred so profound and fundamental that it sickens the soul and distorts all thought.
Have a nice day! And, oh yes. I am eagerly anticipating their rational and well-articulated response to this post.
JOHN KERRY - The Lyin' King
In view of the ramifications of this (KJL wonders if it is a joke; Alexandra thinks it's a travesty); but it is just that young Simba Kerry ("I was in Vietnam, you know") is soooo eager to grow up and be king that he has become even more thoughtless and self-absorbed than he was before. John Kerry, The Lyin' King....
I Just Can't Wait To Be King
-as sung by John F. Kerry
I'm gonna be a nuanced king, so noone need beware!
(Who's ever seen a king of beasts
Who's so obsessed with hair? )
I'm gonna be the mane event;
I bring true elegance!
I'm brushing up on looking down...
I'd love to live in France !
(If only he would go ahead and really take that chance!)
Oh, I just can't wait to be king!
Moveon saying, " do this! "
Swift Boat Vets saying, "not there!"
Teresa saying, "stop that!"
Soros saying, "see here!"
Free to flip and flop around all day
Free to finally do it all my way!
(I think it's time you finally signed
That SF-180 form)
Kings are not just mortal men--
We're to the manor born!
(If this is where the Demorats are headed
Count me out
Out of patience; out of sanity,
They make me want to shout!
This candidate flys with the leftmost wing)
Oh, I just can't wait to be king!
Everybody turn left
Aren't I such a great sight!
Everywhere you look I'm--
Standing in the spotlight!
(Not yet. )
(Let every moonbat hit the brakes and stop,
And watch him as he claws up to the top;
It's gonna be King Kerry's finest flop! )
Oh, I just can't wait to be king!
Oh, I just can't wait to be king!
Oh, I just can't wait
(But we sure can!)
To be king!
I Just Can't Wait To Be King
-as sung by John F. Kerry
I'm gonna be a nuanced king, so noone need beware!
(Who's ever seen a king of beasts
Who's so obsessed with hair? )
I'm gonna be the mane event;
I bring true elegance!
I'm brushing up on looking down...
I'd love to live in France !
(If only he would go ahead and really take that chance!)
Oh, I just can't wait to be king!
Moveon saying, " do this! "
Swift Boat Vets saying, "not there!"
Teresa saying, "stop that!"
Soros saying, "see here!"
Free to flip and flop around all day
Free to finally do it all my way!
(I think it's time you finally signed
That SF-180 form)
Kings are not just mortal men--
We're to the manor born!
(If this is where the Demorats are headed
Count me out
Out of patience; out of sanity,
They make me want to shout!
This candidate flys with the leftmost wing)
Oh, I just can't wait to be king!
Everybody turn left
Aren't I such a great sight!
Everywhere you look I'm--
Standing in the spotlight!
(Not yet. )
(Let every moonbat hit the brakes and stop,
And watch him as he claws up to the top;
It's gonna be King Kerry's finest flop! )
Oh, I just can't wait to be king!
Oh, I just can't wait to be king!
Oh, I just can't wait
(But we sure can!)
To be king!
CARNIVAL OF THE INSANITIES
Time for the weekly insanity udate, where the insane, the bizarre, the ridiculous, and the completely absurd are highlighted for all to see! This has been a week of rare idiocy (as always!).Send your entries for next week's carnival to Dr. Sanity by 8 pm ET on Saturday for Sunday's Carnival. Only one post entry weekly per blogger, please. Thanks for all the submissions. I try to use as many as possible!
SO MANY INSANITIES! SO LITTLE TIME!
1. Sick with envy; and approaching the absolute bottom.
2. Did you know that Global Warming is Racist?
3. Pink with shame? Probably not.
5. Another Rove conspiracy!
6. I knew it was just a matter of time from this to this...!
7. And you thought Howard Dean was a wacko !
8. An Italian artist with the soul of a murdering jihadist beheads Fallaci. How...artistic. (hat tip: Free Thoughts)
9. So, the NY Times can keep a secret when it's really really important, I guess. But their basic philosophy is, "It's Not My Fault!" --about this. I could do an entire Carnival on the insanity of the NY Times.
10. Top 11 Upcoming Selections for the Oprah Book Club. I especially liked #6. Also, the Top 10 Blogger Lies. I'm in big trouble.
11. Introducing the Osama Book Club ! It has already caught on with the lunatic left. All he need is for Hollywood to give him a weekly TV show. He's already the AP's favorite dissident.
12. LEGAL NEWS: Uh-oh. A novel defense approach. This lawyer should consider a career change; and who needs a defense attorney with judges like this?
13. TWOSOMES: They are both simply Mad. Mutt and Jeff.
14. As the song says, if you have a talent for causing people pain, be a dentist!
15. I bet they didn't think about the consequences of their decision to improve the environment.
16. The fat police are coming to a neighborhood near you.
17. A little piece of heaven.
18. Guess who thinks the confirmation process has become too political? ROFL.
19. How sad for them.
20. You can get up now. Priceless
21. Have you ever thought of what the soundtrack for your life would be?
22. I declare a FATWA on NATWA !
23. What could possibly go wrong?
24. Captain Kirk passed one.
25. The great beer tsunami....
26. One man's freedom of speech is another man's libel. And so it goes.
27. Between a Reich and a hard place! (hat tip: Instapundit)
28. Responding to these insanities would be an "act of madness." True. But exposing them is height of psychological health.
Carnival of the Insanities can also be found at The Truth Laid Bear's ÜberCarnival.
***************************************
If you would like to Join the insanity, and add the Carnival of the Insanities button to your sidebar (clicking on it will always take you to the latest update of the Carnival), click on "Word of Blog" below the button to obtain the html code:
Saturday, January 21, 2006
HONOR KILLINGS AND SUICIDE BOMBINGS - ISLAM, ARABS, AND SHAME
SC&A have pointed out to me this article from Frontpagemag.com about the rise in Palestinian "honor" killings. It interestingly links the building of the Israeli "wall" to prevent suicide bombers from entering Israeli land, as the event that may be associated with this increase in violence against Palestinian women:
Honor killings of women are all too common in Arab culture in general (not just the Palestinians); and importantly, this behavior is not dissuaded by the tenets of Islam. If anything, Islam today encourages and validates the Arab male's fundamental belief in the inferiority of women--primarily as a method of proving their own masculinity and rescuing them from the crisis of personal and cultural humiliation they find themselves in at this point in history.
I discuss shame, the Arab psyche and Islam in some detail here.
In Arab/Islamic culture, women are one of the primary instruments of achieving honor. Hence the bizarre and distorted attitude that the culture has toward women and the exaggerated means by which "honor" must be maintained. So strong is the cultural pressure, even some women buy into the delusion (as eloquently demonstrated by Dymphna in this post).
Part of the psychology of this complicity on the part of women (you hear about mothers encouraging the deaths of their own daughters; or even killing them themselves) are the dynamics inherent with identification with the aggressor.
Additionally, women may actively encourage their children to become suicide bombers and act out violently against the Jews in order to protect themselves from becoming the focus of that same violent aggression. This is not dissimilar from the reason some mothers consciously and unconsciously avoid noticing incest in the family; because--as bad as incest is for the children-- one consequence is that it keeps her from having to deal with sexual attentions from her spouse.
David Gutman states in an excellent piece from August, 2005 (also from Frontpagemag.com):
From a psychological perspective the freedom and empowerment of women in Islamic society are absolutely critical for ultimately winning the war on terror and halting the increasingly virulent aspects of both Arab and Islamic culture. It is the women who have the key to this, because they are the one's responsible for the earliest environmental influences on children--influences that will impact the child throughout his or her life. If the culture has little respect for women and regularly demonizes, debases or humiliates them, that will have a profound generational impact.
Women subjected to institutionalized, societal abuse--such as what we saw under the Taliban; and what we see to a greater or lesser extent in almost all Islamic countries--where physical abuse is sanctioned; where women are sexually demonized; where they are deprived of education, as well as physical, social, economic and political freedom) are hardly in a psychological position to be able to provide effective "nurturing" to children.
Women whose own aggressive impulses have been savagely constrained by society and who have few options to sublimate those impulses, are at grave risk of encouraging aggressive and violent "acting out" on the part of their children on their behalf-- especially the male child who must be seriously conflicted about his love for and identification with a lowly-regarded woman.In other words, such women will hardly prevent inappropriate aggression in their offspring, when such aggression vicariously meets their own needs.
And the male children will have to assert their separation and distance from the debased female that is their mother, as aggressively and violently as possible.
This is one important reason why encouraging women's rights around the world--and particularly in the Islamic world-- should be one of the highest priority items in US Foreign Policy.
The residue of the Women's Movement of this country could be at the forefront of promoting international freedom and justice for women by loudly and clearly denouncing the abuse of women under Islam and within Arab culture. Instead they are usually running around academia whining and swooning about their so-called "oppression" by people like Larry Summers and carrying on with silly little demonstrations against the one man who is actually doing something for women in that part of the world.
Meanwhile, the UN appeasement of the degradation and murder of women in the Arab/Muslim world continues unabated. Why should they intervene when the UN's own "peacekeeping" troops have participated in the same barbarities. Anyone who thinks that the UN is a force for good in this world, better think again.
When Israel began erecting a separation barrier in late 2003 to protect its citizens from the seemingly endless procession of suicide bombers, Palestinian society responded by redirecting its destructive urges inward. All revolutions are said ultimately to turn upon themselves and devour their own children. And, when suicide bombing became an increasingly difficult means of enhancing family prestige, Palestinians shifted the focus onto their female offspring to restore the balance.
Suicide bombings in Israel had developed into a bloody and lucrative industry for Palestinians who carried out 39 attacks in 2002. But, since Israel began constructing its anti-terrorist fence, the Palestinian human-bomb industry has been reduced to bankruptcy by producing only 11 attacks in more than two years.
Honor killing, on the other hand – which has always been an integral aspect of Palestinian life – began gathering momentum. With horrifying zest, weapon-wielding fathers, brothers, uncles and sometimes mothers, hunt down their daughters and sisters and commit shocking acts of violence for real and imagined immoral transgressions.
The Arab motivation for murdering their own daughters flows from the same cultural wellspring that produces suicide bombers. The defensive form of honor, called ird, is consumed with female sexual purity and manifests itself in the murder of its own to restore family honor, whereas the offensive manifestation, sharaf, requires positive actions implemented to heighten social status and increase family honor. As Palestinian society retreats from its failure to infiltrate the daily life of Israeli citizens with death and destruction, it compensates by killing its own and depositing ird in its honor bank.
Honor killings of women are all too common in Arab culture in general (not just the Palestinians); and importantly, this behavior is not dissuaded by the tenets of Islam. If anything, Islam today encourages and validates the Arab male's fundamental belief in the inferiority of women--primarily as a method of proving their own masculinity and rescuing them from the crisis of personal and cultural humiliation they find themselves in at this point in history.
I discuss shame, the Arab psyche and Islam in some detail here.
In Arab/Islamic culture, women are one of the primary instruments of achieving honor. Hence the bizarre and distorted attitude that the culture has toward women and the exaggerated means by which "honor" must be maintained. So strong is the cultural pressure, even some women buy into the delusion (as eloquently demonstrated by Dymphna in this post).
Part of the psychology of this complicity on the part of women (you hear about mothers encouraging the deaths of their own daughters; or even killing them themselves) are the dynamics inherent with identification with the aggressor.
Additionally, women may actively encourage their children to become suicide bombers and act out violently against the Jews in order to protect themselves from becoming the focus of that same violent aggression. This is not dissimilar from the reason some mothers consciously and unconsciously avoid noticing incest in the family; because--as bad as incest is for the children-- one consequence is that it keeps her from having to deal with sexual attentions from her spouse.
David Gutman states in an excellent piece from August, 2005 (also from Frontpagemag.com):
the Arab world has stunted the female half of its brain pool, while the men acquire instant self-esteem not by real accomplishment, but by the mere fact of being men, rather than women. No wonder, then, that the Arab nations feel irrationally threatened by the very existence of Israel. Like America, the Jews have brought the reality of the liberated woman into the very heart of the Middle East, into dar al-Islam itself. Big Satan and Little Satan: the champions of Muslim women.
From a psychological perspective the freedom and empowerment of women in Islamic society are absolutely critical for ultimately winning the war on terror and halting the increasingly virulent aspects of both Arab and Islamic culture. It is the women who have the key to this, because they are the one's responsible for the earliest environmental influences on children--influences that will impact the child throughout his or her life. If the culture has little respect for women and regularly demonizes, debases or humiliates them, that will have a profound generational impact.
Women subjected to institutionalized, societal abuse--such as what we saw under the Taliban; and what we see to a greater or lesser extent in almost all Islamic countries--where physical abuse is sanctioned; where women are sexually demonized; where they are deprived of education, as well as physical, social, economic and political freedom) are hardly in a psychological position to be able to provide effective "nurturing" to children.
Women whose own aggressive impulses have been savagely constrained by society and who have few options to sublimate those impulses, are at grave risk of encouraging aggressive and violent "acting out" on the part of their children on their behalf-- especially the male child who must be seriously conflicted about his love for and identification with a lowly-regarded woman.In other words, such women will hardly prevent inappropriate aggression in their offspring, when such aggression vicariously meets their own needs.
And the male children will have to assert their separation and distance from the debased female that is their mother, as aggressively and violently as possible.
This is one important reason why encouraging women's rights around the world--and particularly in the Islamic world-- should be one of the highest priority items in US Foreign Policy.
The residue of the Women's Movement of this country could be at the forefront of promoting international freedom and justice for women by loudly and clearly denouncing the abuse of women under Islam and within Arab culture. Instead they are usually running around academia whining and swooning about their so-called "oppression" by people like Larry Summers and carrying on with silly little demonstrations against the one man who is actually doing something for women in that part of the world.
Meanwhile, the UN appeasement of the degradation and murder of women in the Arab/Muslim world continues unabated. Why should they intervene when the UN's own "peacekeeping" troops have participated in the same barbarities. Anyone who thinks that the UN is a force for good in this world, better think again.
THE COUNCIL HAS SPOKEN !
This week's winners in the Watcher's Council are now posted at the Watcher of Weasels . Every week the Council nominates posts from the blogs of the Council members, and posts from around the blogsphere. The Council then votes to select the "Best" of all these posts. This week includes some incredible writing!BEST COUNCIL POSTS:
First Place
Options on Iran II The Glittering Eye
Second Place
NY Times Confesses Truth About NSA Leak The Strata-Sphere
BEST NON-COUNCIL POSTS:
First Place
NY Times Tipped Terrorists? (UPDATED) The Anchoress
Second Place
Bloggers: The Pamphleteers of Today Liberty and Culture
Be sure to check out all the winners at the Watcher's site. It makes for great weekend reading.
RONALD REAGAN - A Personal Recollection
Today marks the 25th anniversay of Ronald Reagan's being sworn in as the 40th President of the U.S. (GM's Corner has more).
I vividly recall the day I met President Reagan almost exactly 20 years ago. It was one of the saddest days of my life. I was at the Johnson Space Center memorial service for the Challenger astronauts on the Friday after the Challenger accident. The President had come to JSC to honor the fallen crew and to heal the nation.
As the crew surgeon for that mission, I accompanied the families of the crew to a private meeting with President and Mrs. Reagan before he spoke to the large crowd of employees and officials. I felt a little out of place at this private meeting, so I tried to stay off to the side as, one by one, Reagan greeted all the immediate family members and talked with them.
Much to my surprise, after he visited with them for a while, he walked over to where I was standing. Apparently he had asked who I was, because he addressed me as "Doctor" and held out his hand, saying, "It must be especially hard for you today to have lost those who looked up to you as their doctor and who put their trust in you." He said it very quietly and his sincerity and genuine concern for what I was experiencing resulted in bringing tears to my eyes. Until that moment, I had managed to keep it all together and not show my feelings in public.
The next thing I knew, the President of the United States had put his hand on my shoulder and was comforting me; telling me that he understood my loss and that he knew I had been trying to be strong and take care of all the family members of the crew; but that he could see I was suffering too.
I had voted for Reagan in both the '79 and '84 elections (it was the first time I had voted Republican instead of Libertarian), but it wasn't until that moment that I truly understood the personal power of the man; his genuine warmth and the depth of his concern for someone he didn't even know. He instinctively seemed to understand that I had deliberately put aside my personal feelings about the tragedy because I had the awesome responsibility of taking care of all the crew family members (who were also my patients).
It crossed my mind even then, that he was telling me how much he identified with my situation and the responsibilities of my job. He had an entire nation to take care of, but it didn't mean he didn't personlly mourn for those who had died. It could be that I read too much into what he said, but I don't think so. He could have ignored me since I was standing off to the side from all the family members. But he went out of his way to find out who I was and then chose to come over to me.
I remember telling him in a choked voice how much his understanding meant to me and he looked at me with those clear, direct eyes of his and said, "You will be able to handle it. I know you will."
It seemed that I stared into those eyes for a long time (but it was probably only seconds) and then he turned away and signaled to the others that it was time to start the memorial service.
I actually got to stand on the platform while he spoke. This had been the spot prearranged for me to be so I would be able to observe the families in the front row and be ready to respond if they needed me. I couldn't have been more than ten feet or so away from the President during his remarks.
I never spoke to President Reagan again, but at the end of the ceremony; after the missing man formation of T-38's had flown overhead, I accidently caught his eye, and he winked at me.
I will always remember his kindness and strength.
Stop the ACLU has a Reagan tribute, with lots of bloggers linking. Check it out.
I vividly recall the day I met President Reagan almost exactly 20 years ago. It was one of the saddest days of my life. I was at the Johnson Space Center memorial service for the Challenger astronauts on the Friday after the Challenger accident. The President had come to JSC to honor the fallen crew and to heal the nation.
As the crew surgeon for that mission, I accompanied the families of the crew to a private meeting with President and Mrs. Reagan before he spoke to the large crowd of employees and officials. I felt a little out of place at this private meeting, so I tried to stay off to the side as, one by one, Reagan greeted all the immediate family members and talked with them.
Much to my surprise, after he visited with them for a while, he walked over to where I was standing. Apparently he had asked who I was, because he addressed me as "Doctor" and held out his hand, saying, "It must be especially hard for you today to have lost those who looked up to you as their doctor and who put their trust in you." He said it very quietly and his sincerity and genuine concern for what I was experiencing resulted in bringing tears to my eyes. Until that moment, I had managed to keep it all together and not show my feelings in public.
The next thing I knew, the President of the United States had put his hand on my shoulder and was comforting me; telling me that he understood my loss and that he knew I had been trying to be strong and take care of all the family members of the crew; but that he could see I was suffering too.
I had voted for Reagan in both the '79 and '84 elections (it was the first time I had voted Republican instead of Libertarian), but it wasn't until that moment that I truly understood the personal power of the man; his genuine warmth and the depth of his concern for someone he didn't even know. He instinctively seemed to understand that I had deliberately put aside my personal feelings about the tragedy because I had the awesome responsibility of taking care of all the crew family members (who were also my patients).
It crossed my mind even then, that he was telling me how much he identified with my situation and the responsibilities of my job. He had an entire nation to take care of, but it didn't mean he didn't personlly mourn for those who had died. It could be that I read too much into what he said, but I don't think so. He could have ignored me since I was standing off to the side from all the family members. But he went out of his way to find out who I was and then chose to come over to me.
I remember telling him in a choked voice how much his understanding meant to me and he looked at me with those clear, direct eyes of his and said, "You will be able to handle it. I know you will."
It seemed that I stared into those eyes for a long time (but it was probably only seconds) and then he turned away and signaled to the others that it was time to start the memorial service.
I actually got to stand on the platform while he spoke. This had been the spot prearranged for me to be so I would be able to observe the families in the front row and be ready to respond if they needed me. I couldn't have been more than ten feet or so away from the President during his remarks.
I never spoke to President Reagan again, but at the end of the ceremony; after the missing man formation of T-38's had flown overhead, I accidently caught his eye, and he winked at me.
I will always remember his kindness and strength.
Stop the ACLU has a Reagan tribute, with lots of bloggers linking. Check it out.
Friday, January 20, 2006
KILL THE HEROES
A fascinating post at One Cosmos discussing "Pornographic Liberalism and The Last Men". Here is a brief excerpt:
Gagdad Bob has captured the essence of the soul disease that sickens modern "progressives" and infects the art and literature they produce. The key symptoms are characterized by:
-existential cowardice
-malignant narcissism
-spiritual envy
-paralyzed will
-exaggerated self-esteem
-insatiable sense of entitlement
-glorification of emotion
-deification of victimhood
The overarching theme that brings together all of the above symptoms is the pervasive nihilism that masquerades as art and culture these days and which I discussed in a previous post today.
Read the entire post.
Hibbs notes that these Last Men are not the courageous rebels of their narcissistic imaginations, but "timid, enervated, self-enclosed, and self-satisfied," conforming with "the dictates of common opinion.'' Fourteen billion years of cosmic evolution, and what has it wrought: New York Times Man, so hidebound and parochial in his views, and yet, like a child, so confident of his superiority!
These Last Men hate to be reminded that there is something higher or deeper, something transcending their own little self-generated meanings. They are all sheep and no shepherd. And they don't believe in wolves at all. They hate the notion that history is incomplete, that there are real enemies, and that there are real heroes--superior men like President Bush who will name and kill the enemy so that the Last Men may sleep soundly in their beds. They believe that there is nothing to be afraid of but the hero!
In a way they are right, for the hero is a painful reminder of their own existential cowardice. The society of the Last Man "is adept at satisfying nearly all desires for pleasure, but it cannot satiate, indeed it positively frustrates, the will to excel, to prove oneself superior to others." They are afflicted with spiritual envy, the Satanic Eucharist of secular fundamentalism. Kill the hero is their motto. The victim is God is their creed.
Gagdad Bob has captured the essence of the soul disease that sickens modern "progressives" and infects the art and literature they produce. The key symptoms are characterized by:
-existential cowardice
-malignant narcissism
-spiritual envy
-paralyzed will
-exaggerated self-esteem
-insatiable sense of entitlement
-glorification of emotion
-deification of victimhood
The overarching theme that brings together all of the above symptoms is the pervasive nihilism that masquerades as art and culture these days and which I discussed in a previous post today.
Read the entire post.
Shocking Unsurprising News
Why am I not surprised at this news? I'll bet their self-esteem is really high, though; and they all appreciate diversity !
THE CULTURAL ELITE - DEDICATED TO DARKNESS
These days, Hollywood seems to be sending out a message. Gerard Baker notes:
Now we also hear that the assassin who tried to kill Pope John Paul has just signed an $8 million Hollywood film deal (via LGF)
Munich, Syriana, Transamerica, Brokeback Mountain, The Constant Gardner, A Million Little Pieces, etc. etc.
Once upon a time, I thought that movies, literature and art had the goal of entertaining people through the selective recreation of reality, and could inspire and motivate us to a greater appreciation and experience of life. Really great art stands on its own, without any agenda (to paraphrase Sigmund, Carl and Alfred). What we have exemplified in the selections above that are chosen to be honored by various groups is not great art, but art appropriated for the purpose of advocating and disseminating a political agenda. This is what the Soviet Union used to do with all the statues and posters and paintings and "art" that depicted the beefy proletariat workers with their "new" consciousness, standing around proudly to attest to the wondrous glory of Soviet life.
It didn't really convince anyone even then-- except the propaganda experts who created it.
Likewise, the intellectual heirs of the Soviet propaganda experts who now live in "Hollywood"; along with all the rest of the artistic and intellectual elite of the West, have developed a creative alternative to the old Soviet realism style-- which despite its fundamental propaganda style, at least tried to project something positive ("real but fake" you could say).
The agenda of the new propagandists' art is not to "glorify" anything, or at least not to depict anything positively. On the contrary, the current crop of elites seek to destroy and deconstruct the underlying values of the West, for which they feel a profound contempt. The ideology that drives them has failed to create the socialist utopia they yearn for; so now in their despair and spite, their art has evolved to capture and expose the anti-life, anti-beauty, anti-reason, and generally anti-human threads of their souls.
Sometime ago, I wrote about this tendency of the cultural elite of the West to be dedicated to the darkness of the human soul.
Dr. Martin Seligman a well-known researcher in behavior, in an article titled "Misreporting Science in the New York Times: Against Happiness" notes that in the choice of articles on psychology it chooses to print, and in the ones it ignores, the NY Times (one of the advertisers for the new elite) is making a concerted effort to consistently display life as full of "unmitigated tragedy, violence, and meaninglessness." He mentions several well-written books that have never been reviewed by the NY Times Book Review, and some articles on recent research on happiness that never made it to press:
Indeed, you might. And then you could go on to explore most of the recent literature, art, and film that promoted by the Times and other media outlets which are dedicated to the "darkness" to which Dr. Seligman refers.
It is something I am very familiar with, and why I turned to science fiction and fantasy, where there are still moral universes to get lost in. It is why books and films like Harry Potter and Narnia have achieved phenomenal success and why Lord of the Rings were so profoundly successful. They were bright, glittering stars in the midst of a cultural black hole that was sucking all the joy, hope and love from life.
Do you think I am exaggerating? Take a look at the books the NY Times considers worthwhile. They are filled with despairing and hopeless people. Often, their characters aren't even likable. But they supposedly deal with very profound and important issues and are considered "serious" and "literary". I used to try to read some of them, but I found I couldn't ever finish them. They made me sick and gave me nightmares (and I'm not talking about Stephen King novels either). I finally found a pardigm I could live with: If it was recommended by the NY Times and considered an "important" work, I avoided it the same way I try to avoid death.
I finally abandoned reading the NY Times Review of Books entirely after they decided to EXCLUDE the most popular book of the latter part of the 20th century in the Best Seller List and banish it to the Children's Book List. I am referring, of course, to J.K. Rowling's Harry Potter series, which is sneered at by the true literary establishment. As was Tolkien's Lord of the Rings 40 years ago. As is science fiction and mystery (unless it conforms to the "darkness" criteria, I've noticed). And, as for romance novels (and believe it or not, there are truly excellent novels in this genre, that are comparable to the works of Austen, Bronte and others) the anti-intellectual stigma attached to reading such novels says all you need to know about the attitude of the true literary establishment, as exemplified by the NY Times.
Don't get me wrong. One of my majors in college long ago was English Literature. I don't believe that all books need to have happy sappy endings. On the contrary, if books are to teach us about life and all the important issues that involves, it is often necessary to face unpleasantness and pain. Truly wonderful art helps you to do that, while simultaneously rejoicing in the human spirit.
Shall we discuss many of the so-called "artsy" movies? Especially the ones that open in special theaters (if it appeals to the "masses" it must be insipid)? Almost all of them are life-hating, pathetic romps dedicated to the twin themes of despair and hopelessness. Or catering to the darkness within men's souls--if not actively celebrating it. Few and far between are the ones that even explore the light and the goodness of those souls. After being told over and over again that happiness is impossible in this world; that those who pursue it are simple and shallow; and that , as C3PO in "Star Wars"--a wonderful robotic symbol of this mindset--says, "misery and suffering is our lot in life" --is it really any wonder that my profession is overwhelmed by the unhappiness of our fellow humans?
Those who buy into the doom and gloom agenda are so profoundly caught up in their own narcissistic feelings that they can't even tolerate having a political candidate they supported lose an election without suffering post-traumatic stress. I had a patient once who became suicidal because her son had to have surgery and she felt life had no meaning or purpose...and then I found out that her 30 year old son was scheduled for bunion surgery, and I'm afraid I lost all sympathy for her plight.
Truly, there aren't enough antidepressants in the universe to reverse the onslaught of depression and malaise that is aimed at our minds from sun up to sun set that would have us believe that everything is a disaster. Like Denethor, the doomed Warden of Gondor, who has spent years listening to Sauron tell him how hopeless it is to oppose him (in the movie Return of the King); the media --and all those who listen to the Sauron's of today-- would like us to pour oil on the funeral pyre and just light it--because we can't win against evil; we can't win against chaos; we can't win against darkness. We are doomed. Doomed!
Phooey.
SAM GOLDWYN had the only really sensible opinion on the idea of the film industry as a purveyor of political propaganda. “If I want to send a message I’ll use Western Union,” he said.
But Hollywood, once again, has ignored Goldwyn’s strictures. The message from this week’s Golden Globe awards could not have been clearer if it had been written on 18in cue cards delivered door to door across America by Warren Beatty and Annette Bening. It was a plea to a nation firmly on the road to conservative perdition to change course, to embrace alternative lifestyles, foreigners, non-believers and outlandish theories about the motives of US companies.
The Globes honoured, in approximate order of reverence, Brokeback Mountain, a film about a couple of cowboys who discover that there’s a lot more you can do with chaps than put them over your jeans; The Constant Gardener, an adaptation of a John le Carré novel about evil drug companies that kill innocent Africans and the honest campaigners who try to expose them; Syriana, a film so complex it defies synopsis, but you’ll get the gist if I tell you it’s about American oil companies, the CIA and Middle Eastern politics; and Transamerica, a movie that sounds like a drama about life at one of America’s prominent life insurance companies but turns out to be a paean to the life of the transgendered.
Now we also hear that the assassin who tried to kill Pope John Paul has just signed an $8 million Hollywood film deal (via LGF)
Munich, Syriana, Transamerica, Brokeback Mountain, The Constant Gardner, A Million Little Pieces, etc. etc.
Once upon a time, I thought that movies, literature and art had the goal of entertaining people through the selective recreation of reality, and could inspire and motivate us to a greater appreciation and experience of life. Really great art stands on its own, without any agenda (to paraphrase Sigmund, Carl and Alfred). What we have exemplified in the selections above that are chosen to be honored by various groups is not great art, but art appropriated for the purpose of advocating and disseminating a political agenda. This is what the Soviet Union used to do with all the statues and posters and paintings and "art" that depicted the beefy proletariat workers with their "new" consciousness, standing around proudly to attest to the wondrous glory of Soviet life.
It didn't really convince anyone even then-- except the propaganda experts who created it.
Likewise, the intellectual heirs of the Soviet propaganda experts who now live in "Hollywood"; along with all the rest of the artistic and intellectual elite of the West, have developed a creative alternative to the old Soviet realism style-- which despite its fundamental propaganda style, at least tried to project something positive ("real but fake" you could say).
The agenda of the new propagandists' art is not to "glorify" anything, or at least not to depict anything positively. On the contrary, the current crop of elites seek to destroy and deconstruct the underlying values of the West, for which they feel a profound contempt. The ideology that drives them has failed to create the socialist utopia they yearn for; so now in their despair and spite, their art has evolved to capture and expose the anti-life, anti-beauty, anti-reason, and generally anti-human threads of their souls.
Sometime ago, I wrote about this tendency of the cultural elite of the West to be dedicated to the darkness of the human soul.
Dr. Martin Seligman a well-known researcher in behavior, in an article titled "Misreporting Science in the New York Times: Against Happiness" notes that in the choice of articles on psychology it chooses to print, and in the ones it ignores, the NY Times (one of the advertisers for the new elite) is making a concerted effort to consistently display life as full of "unmitigated tragedy, violence, and meaninglessness." He mentions several well-written books that have never been reviewed by the NY Times Book Review, and some articles on recent research on happiness that never made it to press:
What do these books and stories have in common? They are good news. They suggest that virtue, well-being, nobility, happiness, and meaning are all within the realm of human possibility, and that life is not just unmitigated tragedy, violence, and meaninglessness. And they are based on solid, painstaking science involving hundreds of thousands of subjects, hundreds of refereed articles, and scores of doctoral dissertations from the most reputable universities in the world.
But take a shoddily researched and truly lightweight account that can be run as “Against Happiness,” and it leads.
Yes, there are professional pessimists. Yes, there are nattering nabobs of negativism. There are media dedicated to the dividends of darkness that both reflect a cultural bias toward despair and simultaneously shape it. They are enormously influential, and if you wonder why our young people are in the midst of an epidemic of depression and meaninglessness in the presence of unprecedented wealth, education, and opportunity, you might start with what they read in the New York Times.
Indeed, you might. And then you could go on to explore most of the recent literature, art, and film that promoted by the Times and other media outlets which are dedicated to the "darkness" to which Dr. Seligman refers.
It is something I am very familiar with, and why I turned to science fiction and fantasy, where there are still moral universes to get lost in. It is why books and films like Harry Potter and Narnia have achieved phenomenal success and why Lord of the Rings were so profoundly successful. They were bright, glittering stars in the midst of a cultural black hole that was sucking all the joy, hope and love from life.
Do you think I am exaggerating? Take a look at the books the NY Times considers worthwhile. They are filled with despairing and hopeless people. Often, their characters aren't even likable. But they supposedly deal with very profound and important issues and are considered "serious" and "literary". I used to try to read some of them, but I found I couldn't ever finish them. They made me sick and gave me nightmares (and I'm not talking about Stephen King novels either). I finally found a pardigm I could live with: If it was recommended by the NY Times and considered an "important" work, I avoided it the same way I try to avoid death.
I finally abandoned reading the NY Times Review of Books entirely after they decided to EXCLUDE the most popular book of the latter part of the 20th century in the Best Seller List and banish it to the Children's Book List. I am referring, of course, to J.K. Rowling's Harry Potter series, which is sneered at by the true literary establishment. As was Tolkien's Lord of the Rings 40 years ago. As is science fiction and mystery (unless it conforms to the "darkness" criteria, I've noticed). And, as for romance novels (and believe it or not, there are truly excellent novels in this genre, that are comparable to the works of Austen, Bronte and others) the anti-intellectual stigma attached to reading such novels says all you need to know about the attitude of the true literary establishment, as exemplified by the NY Times.
Don't get me wrong. One of my majors in college long ago was English Literature. I don't believe that all books need to have happy sappy endings. On the contrary, if books are to teach us about life and all the important issues that involves, it is often necessary to face unpleasantness and pain. Truly wonderful art helps you to do that, while simultaneously rejoicing in the human spirit.
Shall we discuss many of the so-called "artsy" movies? Especially the ones that open in special theaters (if it appeals to the "masses" it must be insipid)? Almost all of them are life-hating, pathetic romps dedicated to the twin themes of despair and hopelessness. Or catering to the darkness within men's souls--if not actively celebrating it. Few and far between are the ones that even explore the light and the goodness of those souls. After being told over and over again that happiness is impossible in this world; that those who pursue it are simple and shallow; and that , as C3PO in "Star Wars"--a wonderful robotic symbol of this mindset--says, "misery and suffering is our lot in life" --is it really any wonder that my profession is overwhelmed by the unhappiness of our fellow humans?
Those who buy into the doom and gloom agenda are so profoundly caught up in their own narcissistic feelings that they can't even tolerate having a political candidate they supported lose an election without suffering post-traumatic stress. I had a patient once who became suicidal because her son had to have surgery and she felt life had no meaning or purpose...and then I found out that her 30 year old son was scheduled for bunion surgery, and I'm afraid I lost all sympathy for her plight.
Truly, there aren't enough antidepressants in the universe to reverse the onslaught of depression and malaise that is aimed at our minds from sun up to sun set that would have us believe that everything is a disaster. Like Denethor, the doomed Warden of Gondor, who has spent years listening to Sauron tell him how hopeless it is to oppose him (in the movie Return of the King); the media --and all those who listen to the Sauron's of today-- would like us to pour oil on the funeral pyre and just light it--because we can't win against evil; we can't win against chaos; we can't win against darkness. We are doomed. Doomed!
Phooey.
Thursday, January 19, 2006
THE SHRILL OPPORTUNISM OF HILLARY CLINTON
Hillary Clinton in a speech addressing the National Security Challenges of Our Time: Fighting Terror and the Spread of Weapons of Mass Destruction at the Brookings Institute; February 25, 2004
Hillary Clinton at Princeton University, on January 18, 2006
Now, an Administration that has celebrated freedom of action over collective action in Iraq, is scrambling for friends and institutions to bail us out. The go-it-alone instinct of this Administration has now demonstrably failed. Our experience in Iraq demonstrates that power, not harnessed to a sense of international legitimacy, is a flawed strategy. The question is whether the Administration's about-face in Iraq signifies a deeper re-evaluation of their attitudes toward the world. That is, has the Administration come to understand that the 50-year bipartisan consensus supporting multilateralism was not an excuse for weakness, but an exercise of strength?
The answer to this question is critical to understanding whether the Administration's foreign policy is undergoing a shift, brought on by our experience in Iraq that views our allies and the international community as partners in the War on Terror. For a failure to learn the lessons from our policy failure in Iraq will be disastrous in the War on Terror.
So, this morning, I'd like to talk about the dangers of pursuing a policy of unilateralism and the need for allies in every aspect of our security. Critical to fighting this new 21st century war is a fundamental re-orientation away from a unilateral posture to a multilateral strategy that strengthens all who participate.
Hillary Clinton at Princeton University, on January 18, 2006
"I believe that we lost critical time in dealing with Iran because the White House chose to downplay the threats and to outsource the negotiations," Ms. Clinton said, according to a transcript of the speech published by The Daily Princetonian. "I don't believe you face threats like Iran or North Korea by outsourcing it to others and standing on the sidelines."
DESPERATE OSAMA APPEALS TO THE WEAK-MINDED
Is anyone surprised that Osama has picked up the main talking points of the Left and their MSM media outlets? He, too, seems as obsessed with American polls as those on the Left are to justify their positions.
Meanwhile, apparently aware that when the enemy of the U.S. parrots all their important Bush-hating memes, it is not a good thing--what do you suppose the first response of the lunatic Left is?
That's right! The Osama tape is all part of a plot by Bush to get the Patriot Act passed etc. etc. and so on toward infinite paranoia and delusion.
Walid Phares has some interesting thoughts on the Bin Laden audiotape.
The release of this tape so soon after the apparently successful U.S. attack in Pakistan that took out some high value Al Qaeda targets, can only mean one thing from a psychological perspective. Bin Laden knows his side is losing and is desperate to hide that fundamental truth from his followers and from his Western enablers.
He also knows that only by quickly and aggressively motivating his jihad base with more of the usual grandiose and psychotic rhetoric can he hold together his crumbling jihad.
One final thing that Osama understands is that as long as he has the clueless but very useful idiots of the Left--including those within the Democratic Party-- on his side and constantly working toward his goals; he still has fair chance to manipulate the U.S. into defeating itself.
Personally, I still tend to think that Osama himself is dead. But whether he is dead or alive, Al Qaeda's PSYOPS --like the Star War's "force"-- can have a strong influence on the weak-minded.
UPDATE: Neil Cavuto on FoxNews just reported that the stock market closed UP today even after Bin Laden's tape was released. Apparently the market hasn't been fooled by Bin Laden's talk of "truce" and don't see any reason to take what he says seriously.
UPDATE II: Apparently al-Jazeera did not translate Bin Laden correctly. According to MEMRI, Osama did not offer us a truce, he offered only to abide by one if WE offered a truce to him. Dream on.
Meanwhile, apparently aware that when the enemy of the U.S. parrots all their important Bush-hating memes, it is not a good thing--what do you suppose the first response of the lunatic Left is?
That's right! The Osama tape is all part of a plot by Bush to get the Patriot Act passed etc. etc. and so on toward infinite paranoia and delusion.
Walid Phares has some interesting thoughts on the Bin Laden audiotape.
The release of this tape so soon after the apparently successful U.S. attack in Pakistan that took out some high value Al Qaeda targets, can only mean one thing from a psychological perspective. Bin Laden knows his side is losing and is desperate to hide that fundamental truth from his followers and from his Western enablers.
He also knows that only by quickly and aggressively motivating his jihad base with more of the usual grandiose and psychotic rhetoric can he hold together his crumbling jihad.
One final thing that Osama understands is that as long as he has the clueless but very useful idiots of the Left--including those within the Democratic Party-- on his side and constantly working toward his goals; he still has fair chance to manipulate the U.S. into defeating itself.
Personally, I still tend to think that Osama himself is dead. But whether he is dead or alive, Al Qaeda's PSYOPS --like the Star War's "force"-- can have a strong influence on the weak-minded.
UPDATE: Neil Cavuto on FoxNews just reported that the stock market closed UP today even after Bin Laden's tape was released. Apparently the market hasn't been fooled by Bin Laden's talk of "truce" and don't see any reason to take what he says seriously.
UPDATE II: Apparently al-Jazeera did not translate Bin Laden correctly. According to MEMRI, Osama did not offer us a truce, he offered only to abide by one if WE offered a truce to him. Dream on.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)