Great article. I agree all the way. Also, thank you for using my picture from Afghanistan, which I made available on Flickr. I'm always happy to see that people find them useful even if the quality leaves something to be desired because many were shot with a cheap fixed-focus camera.
We all know that those who tell the truth are castigated, reviled and detested. I hope that you can rise above such attacks and continue to espouse the truth. Our very existence relies on it.
Western culture is premised on ideals as absolutes. The long shadow of God.
Logically a spiritual absolute would be the essence of sentience, from which we rise, not an ideal of wisdom and judgement, from which we fell. More the light shining through the film, than the images on it.
Culture tends to see good and bad as some cosmic conflict between the forces of righteousness and evil, though they are the basic biological binary of beneficial and detrimental, because society needs to function as a larger organism in times of stress.
People are ninety percent emotion and ten percent logic on a good day, yours truly included, so waving the bloody handkerchief is pretty effective in spooking the herd.
It would be one thing, if those pulling the strings actually had the interests of the larger society in mind, but it should be evident to even the most clueless this isn't the case.
If this dynamic is to be examined to a broad degree, it will take a deep dive into the cultural paradigm and this can only occur in the aftermath of a pretty significant reality check. Of which we might just be in the early stages.
I expressed similar sentiments in one of novels where the son had been blown to bits in Vietnam. Here is the excerpt. (Tyler being the son who never met his father because of the war).
One thing was for sure; they weren’t going to go off blindly to war. It’s hard to say Momma Daisy, Pappy and the rest had all become pacifists. To Tyler, that didn’t seem the right term. But there was a decided firmness against war. And he did know they all lived by Momma’s directive, “There ain’t no boy or girl in this family gonna go off and die for some president and the rich men that pull his strings. If somebody come marchin’ into Georgia, we’ll decide then what to do.”
As I said, Patrick, I have one more comment. One of your commenters complained about "indiscriminate Russian bombing" and a couple of more comments that prompted me to recall a story by Keith Laumer, the science fiction author, wherein he has his protagonist Retief, diplomat of the corps diplomatique terrestriene, listen to a rant from one of the species on the planet about another species on the planet. In the end, this character says, "do you agree Retief?" Retief's response is "Minus the slanted adjectives, yes." But that is a lot of what passes for news now a days. A bunch of slanted adjectives that tell you what you are supposed to understand about the "news" instead of, as Joe Friday would have said, "Just the facts, ma'am". Getting just the facts can be tough. Your commenter nom claiming the millions of refugees headed his way with their dead doesn't appear to discriminate between those fleeing Russian bombing and those fleeing Kievian shelling.
As always Patrick you lay out the situation - with chronological aspects and context and with a reasonable and unemotional clarity I truly admire. Thank heavens for voices such as yours. Jim K
A Canadian snowbird in Florida, I have many American friends and they all think America is “a leader not a hegemonic power” as per your piece on professor Hoffman, they are completely oblivious. Question: is the leadership at the New York Times also oblivious, blind to America’s true nature or is it cynicism and cunning at play?
Are they, NYT, true believers? Professor Deneen on his substack “the post liberal order” calls it “the political Gnosticism of imperial liberalism”. So once again my question is, in your opinion does NYT believe this nonsense: America is a leader not a hegemonic power?
Russia is a corrupt, Putin a murderer therefore let’s promote democracy, America’s values will save them. NYT can’t be that stupid, can they?
https://caitlinjohnstone.substack.com/p/this-aint-putins-price-hike-notes?r=j0s6f&s=r&utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=email
Caitlin is much more direct than Peter L.
Great article. I agree all the way. Also, thank you for using my picture from Afghanistan, which I made available on Flickr. I'm always happy to see that people find them useful even if the quality leaves something to be desired because many were shot with a cheap fixed-focus camera.
We all know that those who tell the truth are castigated, reviled and detested. I hope that you can rise above such attacks and continue to espouse the truth. Our very existence relies on it.
Thank you--I agree with every word.
The trolley problem, writ large.
Western culture is premised on ideals as absolutes. The long shadow of God.
Logically a spiritual absolute would be the essence of sentience, from which we rise, not an ideal of wisdom and judgement, from which we fell. More the light shining through the film, than the images on it.
Culture tends to see good and bad as some cosmic conflict between the forces of righteousness and evil, though they are the basic biological binary of beneficial and detrimental, because society needs to function as a larger organism in times of stress.
People are ninety percent emotion and ten percent logic on a good day, yours truly included, so waving the bloody handkerchief is pretty effective in spooking the herd.
It would be one thing, if those pulling the strings actually had the interests of the larger society in mind, but it should be evident to even the most clueless this isn't the case.
If this dynamic is to be examined to a broad degree, it will take a deep dive into the cultural paradigm and this can only occur in the aftermath of a pretty significant reality check. Of which we might just be in the early stages.
This is an excellent analysis and review. Well done and well thought out.
Erik
The immense DNC-CIA’s Russia-gate hoax DIRECTLY led to the current catastrophe and tragedy in Ukraine
How US-backed Maidan coup, Russia-gate led to war in Ukraine
How US-backed Maidan coup, Russiagate led to war in Ukraine - YouTube
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M_Gzgu47wAc
Ukraine on Fire – Oliver Stone (now censored by Amazon, Google, etc.)
Ukraine On Fire (rumble.com)
https://rumble.com/vwxxi8-ukraine-on-fire.html
------------------------------------------------
Podcast: Thoughts on Ukraine - by Darryl Cooper (substack.com)
https://martyrmade.substack.com/p/podcast-thoughts-on-ukraine/comments?s=r
Podcast: Thoughts on Ukraine -- Darryl Cooper (March 13, 2022)
FYI -- Last summer Vladimir Putin wrote an article about the historical relationship between Russia and Ukraine.
https://russiaeu.ru/en/news/article-russian-president-vladimir-putin-historical-unity-russians-and-ukrainians
I agree with others--very well laid out.
I expressed similar sentiments in one of novels where the son had been blown to bits in Vietnam. Here is the excerpt. (Tyler being the son who never met his father because of the war).
One thing was for sure; they weren’t going to go off blindly to war. It’s hard to say Momma Daisy, Pappy and the rest had all become pacifists. To Tyler, that didn’t seem the right term. But there was a decided firmness against war. And he did know they all lived by Momma’s directive, “There ain’t no boy or girl in this family gonna go off and die for some president and the rich men that pull his strings. If somebody come marchin’ into Georgia, we’ll decide then what to do.”
As I said, Patrick, I have one more comment. One of your commenters complained about "indiscriminate Russian bombing" and a couple of more comments that prompted me to recall a story by Keith Laumer, the science fiction author, wherein he has his protagonist Retief, diplomat of the corps diplomatique terrestriene, listen to a rant from one of the species on the planet about another species on the planet. In the end, this character says, "do you agree Retief?" Retief's response is "Minus the slanted adjectives, yes." But that is a lot of what passes for news now a days. A bunch of slanted adjectives that tell you what you are supposed to understand about the "news" instead of, as Joe Friday would have said, "Just the facts, ma'am". Getting just the facts can be tough. Your commenter nom claiming the millions of refugees headed his way with their dead doesn't appear to discriminate between those fleeing Russian bombing and those fleeing Kievian shelling.
As always Patrick you lay out the situation - with chronological aspects and context and with a reasonable and unemotional clarity I truly admire. Thank heavens for voices such as yours. Jim K
A Canadian snowbird in Florida, I have many American friends and they all think America is “a leader not a hegemonic power” as per your piece on professor Hoffman, they are completely oblivious. Question: is the leadership at the New York Times also oblivious, blind to America’s true nature or is it cynicism and cunning at play?
Are they, NYT, true believers? Professor Deneen on his substack “the post liberal order” calls it “the political Gnosticism of imperial liberalism”. So once again my question is, in your opinion does NYT believe this nonsense: America is a leader not a hegemonic power?
Russia is a corrupt, Putin a murderer therefore let’s promote democracy, America’s values will save them. NYT can’t be that stupid, can they?