Discussion Topic |
|
This thread has been locked |
Bamm_Bamm
Social climber
Out in the Wilderness looking for Dr. F
|
|
I for one eagerly await reading your chronicles.
You can never have too many good goat stories.
|
|
mojede
Trad climber
Butte, America
|
|
I'll bet that not a one of those "czars" has that title anywhere on their business card, or any other official paperwork.
Just another overused word folks--the fault of the language limit.
edit: When my father was Bank Commissioner for the State of MT, he was dubbed "banking czar" in the local papers--a purely invented term.
|
|
Gobee
Trad climber
Los Angeles
|
|
> LITTLE JOHNNY COMES THRU AGAIN!
>
> >
> >
> > The
> > teacher said, "Let's begin by reviewing some
> > American History. Who said 'Give me Liberty, or give me
> > Death'?"
> >
> > She saw a sea of blank faces, except for Little Johnny, a
> > bright Navajo Indian boy who had his hand up.
> > "'Patrick Henry, 1775," he said.
> >
> > "Very good!"
> >
> > Who said, "Government of the People, by the People,
> > for the People, shall not perish from the Earth?"
> >
> > Again, no response except from Little Johnny, "Abraham
> > Lincoln, 1863."
> >
> > The teacher snapped at the class, "Class, you should
> > be ashamed, Little Johnny knows more about history than you
> > do."
> >
> > She heard a loud whisper: "Screw the Indians."
> >
> > "Who said that?" she demanded.
> >
> > Little Johnny put his hand up, "General Custer,
> > 1876 ."
> >
> > At that point, a student in the back said, "I'm
> > gonna puke."
> >
> > The teacher glares around and asks, "All right! Now
> > who said that!?"
> >
> > Again, Little Johnny says, "George Bush to the
> > Japanese Prime Minister, 1991."
> >
> > Now furious, another student yells, "Oh yeah? Suck
> > this!"
> >
> > Little Johnny jumps out of his chair waving his hand and
> > shouts to the teacher, "Bill Clinton, to Monica
> > Lewinsky, 1997!"
> >
> > Now with almost mob hysteria someone said "You little
> > sh#t. If you say anything else, I'll kill you."
> >
> > Little Johnny frantically yells at the top of his voice,
> > "Michael Jackson to the child witnesses testifying
> > against him- 2004."
> >
> > The teacher fainted..
> >
> > And as the class gathered around the teacher on the floor,
> > someone said, "Oh sh#t, We're screwed!"
> >
> > Little Johnny said
> > quietly, "The American people, November 4,
> > 2008."
|
|
Largo
Sport climber
The Big Wide Open Face
|
|
APOGEE WROTE: "Attributing various actions to the make-up of one's mind is a cop-out and places choice and personal control below biology. Each person who posts here has enough properly functioning biologic material between their ears to be able to make better choices about what they say, and how they say it."
I'm suggesting that this is not the case at all - at least not with the far right or far left. The "choices" are completely determined by irrational psychological factors being masked by "reasons," a situation errily like the alcoholic unable to arrest his drinking through will power, and who's destructive drinking is, ironically, a result of "self-will gone mad."
Wirth these folks, all choices are the result of underlying psychological factors, a knid of skrim through which reality is extruded and outputed in a predictible form. Insisting that these people simply sack it up and start reasoning their way to saner, more balanced responses is to maintain an unrealistic expectation.
One of the key factors is "guilt aversion," which translates to a pathalogical aversion to taking responsibility for fear of feeling guilty. The only way to keep the aversion on line is to stay "other focused" and engaged in scapegoating. So long as they stay focused on the imagined sins (always doomsday with these folks - the sky is always on the brink of falling) of others, and the end of the world that will result from these sins, they risk no introspection, no accounting for their own part in things, and get to vent off some of the wrath covering their terror of change.
Psychobabble? Just ask the extremes for some accountability and some coming clean on their part in all of this and see how fast the questing gets inverted or dodged or explained away.
What makes all of this managable now is that the resonses are largely predictable so long as you understand the complex behind it all.
I can totally understand wanting to grab these folks and shake some sense into them or hold them up to a higher standard and demand more from them, not leting them off the hook for being exploitive, for awefulizing and catstrophizing, fear mongering, and all of that, but in fact we might as well be yelling at an alcoholic because he can't stop drinking. Of course, he can stop drinking, just not through his own will.
JL
|
|
bluering
Trad climber
Santa Clara, Ca.
|
|
Bob, Bush had 35 'czars' over 8 years.
Obama has 32 in less than a year.
WTF? Do we really need these czars, really?
(I'm not even sure about your wiki-source, either. Wiki ain't even sure.)
|
|
bluering
Trad climber
Santa Clara, Ca.
|
|
You mean delegation of money....
|
|
bluering
Trad climber
Santa Clara, Ca.
|
|
It gives the feeling of a bunch of new 'bureaus' and 'departments', like the Dept of Education that should be scrapped.
Inflation of the size of worthless government.
|
|
apogee
climber
|
|
"It gives the feeling of a bunch of new 'bureaus' and 'departments', like the Dept of Education that should be scrapped.
Inflation of the size of worthless government."
Pay attention to reality, blue, and stop looking at the facts through your tainted glasses: every administration has 'czars' (or something like it), and the last POTUS (remember him?) presided over the largest buildup in government in history (DHS being one good example). That's an uncontestable fact, unless you choose to ignore it.
|
|
bluering
Trad climber
Santa Clara, Ca.
|
|
And I didn't support it then either....
|
|
Bamm_Bamm
Social climber
Out in the Wilderness looking for Dr. F
|
|
"Delegation of authority, basic tenet of management.
"Advise and Consent"
Basic tenet of the Constitution.
|
|
WandaFuca
Gym climber
A survey where 68% preferred this Fuca over others
|
|
Tell that to Bush/Cheney.
|
|
apogee
climber
|
|
John, the pyschologic dynamics you describe are true enough, and certainly there are people whose brain biology is such that the choice of using social filters in their communications and actions isn't really an option for them. Relative to the general populace, however, the number of people who are 'biologically disadvantaged' (WTF?) are small, and I doubt seriously that most of them are here on ST, contributing to this thread. (Wait a minute.......No, I stand by that.)
Individuals have choices in their actions and communication- for some, making choices is harder than others. I give the benefit of the doubt to most everyone who posts here that they have adequately functioning brains and psyches, and that most of the extremes of behavior and communication that takes place here is because individuals choose to communicate and act that way.
Outside of ST, I believe the situation is about the same. Most of these people exhibiting bizarre, extreme behaviors and actions in political situations are allowing emotion to overcome their rationality. After all, it is much easier to react than it is to think- choosing the easiest path is a phenomenon that is quite common and familiar in this society.
I guess the point I am making is that while the biologic structure of one's brain influences actions and communication, the element of choice exists for almost all human beings. (I think.) To write off an individual's actions due to their biology is to not take responsibility for their choice- and for most people, that is always an option.
|
|
bluering
Trad climber
Santa Clara, Ca.
|
|
I can totally understand wanting to grab these folks and shake some sense into them or hold them up to a higher standard and demand more from them, not leting them off the hook for being exploitive, for awefulizing and catstrophizing, fear mongering, and all of that, but in fact we might as well be yelling at an alcoholic because he can't stop drinking. Of course, he can stop drinking, just not through his own will.
JL
Maybe John should be a 'thought czar'. That way he could show everybody how to think 'clearly', like him.
|
|
WandaFuca
Gym climber
A survey where 68% preferred this Fuca over others
|
|
There are Republicans of intelligence.
It's just that they utilize their ability to reason whithin the well-defined parameters of their cave.
|
|
apogee
climber
|
|
It's about time you showed your real thoughts to Largo, blue. You've been strikingly obsequious with him, which is uncharacteristic (and unbecoming) of you.
|
|
jstan
climber
|
|
I believe we have all been puzzled by a theme of anger that has developed and the readiness people show for retreating into that mode immediately as things get tough. We have been writing it off as simply a destructive fad that has developed through imitation. But it gets very hard to continue buying that when you see angry people working feverishly against their own best interests. I'll put it in basic terms. We use anger to help us function when we are up against a grizzly bear, But the act itself is clearly intended to be in our own interest. What we see people doing now is getting mad and going up to the bear and offering it their throats.
The last time we all had seen an act connected to a consequence was Viet Nam. Since that time the volunteer military and all of the interventions funded by selling our debt abroad have shielded us against consequences. Even the stock market dump of 2000 was pumped back up into another bubble only to dump again.
So our expectation now is that there shall never again be a consequence for anything we do. Somebody does not like it, we nuke them.
This or something as major could indeed break our connection to reality.
Without that connection
we become irrational beings.
There is a very large reality out there.
Somebody owns us now.
If I had invested my fate in a place and saw it being used by a bunch of irrational people giving me no return on my investment, what do you suppose I might do?
I'd go squeeze that economy and if those people want to continue eating, they would decide to follow orders.
The Golden Rule:
The person holding the gold makes the rules.
|
|
Jeremy Handren
climber
NV
|
|
Bamm Bamm said
"Hitler was a socialist, he called himself a socialist. Why you would want to deny that I don't know.
Hitler understood completely that he needed the control over his government and the German people that socialism gave him"
Those statements stand in complete contrast to the historical record as I understand it.
Hitler over and over again in his speeches denounced socialism. The primary reason for his antisematism was his belief that the socialist movement was a jewish conspiracy.
Some of his first acts as chancellor were to outlaw the socialist parties in germany. Killing many and sending the rest to concentration camps.
The paramilitary organization of the Nazis were in constant battle with those of the social democrat and communist parties. And when I say battle, I mean killing each other with regularity at political meetings.
The Nazi party dismantled, outlawed, and murdered the leaders of what had been a very strong labour movement throughout industrial germany.
|
|
scarcollector
climber
CO
|
|
Hitler called himself a good Christian too. One of the keys of rhetorical persuasion is to always claim the moral high ground.
|
|
Mighty Hiker
Social climber
Vancouver, B.C.
|
|
Not to get RJ excited, but insofar as socialism and social democracy go, Hitler and the Nazis were wolves in sheep's clothing. Assuming that 'socialism' at least means standing up for human and democratic rights, and for those of lower incomes (labourers, farmers, etc), the Nazis for all their rhetoric were the exact opposite. Certainly in their first few years the Nazis imposed some economic order from which many benefited; Germany was savaged by economic turmoil in the late 1920s and during the depression. But as Jeremy reports, they also ruthlessly oppressed social democratic, labour and farmers' organizations and parties.
The first step in rationally examining politics, politicians and their actions is to ignore the rhetoric. And the Nazis were if nothing else masters of political rhetoric and agitprop.
Edit: And pay no attention to that man behind the curtain!
|
|
|
SuperTopo on the Web
|
Let us know!