I just think that this topic is a perfect example of how our emotions can get the best of us, things are taken personally when they shouldn't be, and the staying on track is often lost due to emotional charge. The sooner we stop taking things emotionally personal, the better these forums can be. Again, this post is not meant toward anyone specific, and my words are just words.
Having emotions isn't a bad thing (and for whatever it's worth, one can feel and react, and not have it "get the best of us"). It's not necessarily tantamount to stomping feet and calling names. It can guide us, lend to insights.
I'd rather have that humanness enter into issues constructively. Seems like it did here.
Finally, yes it did.
Not sure if you've read Ishmael, but that book always got me thinking. If we accept that we evolve in ways that lead to our continued existence in this universe (like animals with defences from predators, trees with roots to collect moisture, etc), then the evolution to feel so deeply as we do is a factor in our continued existence too (i.e. the fact that we are inherently empathetic is by design, not coincidence). Then, what does it say about us as a species if we opt to neglect a feature intrinsic to our design in favour of ones that aren't (like gluttony, greed, and apathy)?
It's been almost 10 years since I read it, and I've been thinking about rereading it again. (thanks for the reminder!) If any book has gotten me to think about things, it's that book. One of my all-time faves.
What I was talking about with acting on our emotions rather than cool-headed logic, is that perhaps when it comes to politics, keeping logic in check rather than getting carried away with emotions, that lead to acting on our emotions rather than logic, doesn't work out. It doesn't work out for the country. It doesn't work out in the forum settings when one carries that emotion onto a personal level, for sure, making a topic into a personal feelings and emotions and losing logic altogether. Somewhere there's got to be a balance.
But you've got me thinking about evolution and how we may neglect that natural empathetic nature. Certainly power, money, and ego have something to do with it. The artificial things… But I'm going to think more about that.
To think “logically,” people must think calmly and clearly, rationally, so obviously to keep that from happening emotions must be created to keep rational thinking out of the picture. Fear, racism, anger, selfishness, hatred and war all drive out cool, collected thinking, so obviously fear, racism, anger, selfishness, hatred and war have to be promoted at all cost … cost is no problem when the future of the 0.01 percent’s fortunes and power are at stake.
The problem with this quote is that it assumes your fellow citizens are stupid. That they cannot think for themselves. That you are enlightened yet they are rubes. You are rational while their minds arw under the control of the 0.01%. It's quite an elitist attitude.
Well, yeah, I actually think that's about right... only I wouldn't use words like "stupid" or "rubes", but I would say too many of my fellow citizens are uninformed, uneducated, incurious, apathetic, disinterested, lazy or any combination of those traits. And I know some people who are very much like that whom I care very much for but I also know I wouldn't want them making major decisions regarding important matters... unless it's something like bringing the guacamole to the party.
I go back and forth on this. Sometimes I judge others for not having a clue what is going on beyond their own household fence.
Other times, I envy it.
I think the article is bunk, to be honest. comparing the current political climate in america to pre-nazi germany? that's a stretch at best.
I'm a little uneasy with people so easily dismissing an entire group who vote one way as ignorant or stupid or whatever it is you want to call it.
and most of the reason i discuss current events here is because, save for the one-off "political cartoon" that people will post on facebook, most people I talk to either don't want to talk current events with friends, or they simply aren't able to.
and sometimes I really don't want to know how bigoted and ignorant my loved ones are. LOL.
and most of the reason i discuss current events here is because, save for the one-off "political cartoon" that people will post on facebook, most people I talk to either don't want to talk current events with friends, or they simply aren't able to.
and sometimes I really don't want to know how bigoted and ignorant my loved ones are. LOL.
This I won't even attemp to talk to family & friends about politics I keep my thoughts to myself that shit will create a divide amongst family & friends just like borrowing $ or having work done by family or friends I won't do it ...
To think “logically,” people must think calmly and clearly, rationally, so obviously to keep that from happening emotions must be created to keep rational thinking out of the picture. Fear, racism, anger, selfishness, hatred and war all drive out cool, collected thinking, so obviously fear, racism, anger, selfishness, hatred and war have to be promoted at all cost … cost is no problem when the future of the 0.01 percent’s fortunes and power are at stake.
The problem with this quote is that it assumes your fellow citizens are stupid. That they cannot think for themselves. That you are enlightened yet they are rubes. You are rational while their minds arw under the control of the 0.01%. It's quite an elitist attitude.
Well, yeah, I actually think that's about right... only I wouldn't use words like "stupid" or "rubes", but I would say too many of my fellow citizens are uninformed, uneducated, incurious, apathetic, disinterested, lazy or any combination of those traits. And I know some people who are very much like that whom I care very much for but I also know I wouldn't want them making major decisions regarding important matters... unless it's something like bringing the guacamole to the party.
I go back and forth on this. Sometimes I judge others for not having a clue what is going on beyond their own household fence.
Other times, I envy it.
I think the article is bunk, to be honest. comparing the current political climate in america to pre-nazi germany? that's a stretch at best.
I'm a little uneasy with people so easily dismissing an entire group who vote one way as ignorant or stupid or whatever it is you want to call it.
now where's that guacamole recipe......
Good post Hugh.
And I fucking hate Cilantro and Red Onions in Guacamole for the record.
To think “logically,” people must think calmly and clearly, rationally, so obviously to keep that from happening emotions must be created to keep rational thinking out of the picture. Fear, racism, anger, selfishness, hatred and war all drive out cool, collected thinking, so obviously fear, racism, anger, selfishness, hatred and war have to be promoted at all cost … cost is no problem when the future of the 0.01 percent’s fortunes and power are at stake.
The problem with this quote is that it assumes your fellow citizens are stupid. That they cannot think for themselves. That you are enlightened yet they are rubes. You are rational while their minds arw under the control of the 0.01%. It's quite an elitist attitude.
Well, yeah, I actually think that's about right... only I wouldn't use words like "stupid" or "rubes", but I would say too many of my fellow citizens are uninformed, uneducated, incurious, apathetic, disinterested, lazy or any combination of those traits. And I know some people who are very much like that whom I care very much for but I also know I wouldn't want them making major decisions regarding important matters... unless it's something like bringing the guacamole to the party.
I go back and forth on this. Sometimes I judge others for not having a clue what is going on beyond their own household fence.
Other times, I envy it.
I think the article is bunk, to be honest. comparing the current political climate in america to pre-nazi germany? that's a stretch at best.
I'm a little uneasy with people so easily dismissing an entire group who vote one way as ignorant or stupid or whatever it is you want to call it.
now where's that guacamole recipe......
Good post Hugh.
And I fucking hate Cilantro and Red Onions in Guacamole for the record.
Cilantro is not a food. It's a weed. Yuk! Haha!
“The fear of death follows from the fear of life. A man [or woman] who lives fully is prepared to die at any time.”
To think “logically,” people must think calmly and clearly, rationally, so obviously to keep that from happening emotions must be created to keep rational thinking out of the picture. Fear, racism, anger, selfishness, hatred and war all drive out cool, collected thinking, so obviously fear, racism, anger, selfishness, hatred and war have to be promoted at all cost … cost is no problem when the future of the 0.01 percent’s fortunes and power are at stake.
The problem with this quote is that it assumes your fellow citizens are stupid. That they cannot think for themselves. That you are enlightened yet they are rubes. You are rational while their minds arw under the control of the 0.01%. It's quite an elitist attitude.
Well, yeah, I actually think that's about right... only I wouldn't use words like "stupid" or "rubes", but I would say too many of my fellow citizens are uninformed, uneducated, incurious, apathetic, disinterested, lazy or any combination of those traits. And I know some people who are very much like that whom I care very much for but I also know I wouldn't want them making major decisions regarding important matters... unless it's something like bringing the guacamole to the party.
I go back and forth on this. Sometimes I judge others for not having a clue what is going on beyond their own household fence.
Other times, I envy it.
I think the article is bunk, to be honest. comparing the current political climate in america to pre-nazi germany? that's a stretch at best.
I'm a little uneasy with people so easily dismissing an entire group who vote one way as ignorant or stupid or whatever it is you want to call it.
now where's that guacamole recipe......
Good post Hugh.
And I fucking hate Cilantro and Red Onions in Guacamole for the record.
Cilantro is not a food. It's a weed. Yuk! Haha!
Hahaha that gives weeds a bad name! I think Cilantro is as useful for cooking as it is for smoking...
I think we need to head Kat's subtle warning and get this thread back on track.
As much as I hate to admit it, The Republican party is not all evil. I know some very fine folks who are registered Republican. But the party is like a salad. When I was a kid it was fairly basic and there lots of greens in the party. Same with the Republican party. It once was populated with conservationists. For example, though not the perfect environmentalist, Teddy Roosevelt did pave the way to having much land set aside. But today, like the fancy salads we see now, we find some rather nasty ingredients like cilantro tossed in the mix which wrecks havoc on the whole party.
Boss Kat, please forgive me, the devil made me do it. (And if it makes you feel better, my wife loves cilantro too).
“The fear of death follows from the fear of life. A man [or woman] who lives fully is prepared to die at any time.”
I just think that this topic is a perfect example of how our emotions can get the best of us, things are taken personally when they shouldn't be, and the staying on track is often lost due to emotional charge. The sooner we stop taking things emotionally personal, the better these forums can be. Again, this post is not meant toward anyone specific, and my words are just words.
Having emotions isn't a bad thing (and for whatever it's worth, one can feel and react, and not have it "get the best of us"). It's not necessarily tantamount to stomping feet and calling names. It can guide us, lend to insights.
I'd rather have that humanness enter into issues constructively. Seems like it did here.
Finally, yes it did.
Not sure if you've read Ishmael, but that book always got me thinking. If we accept that we evolve in ways that lead to our continued existence in this universe (like animals with defences from predators, trees with roots to collect moisture, etc), then the evolution to feel so deeply as we do is a factor in our continued existence too (i.e. the fact that we are inherently empathetic is by design, not coincidence). Then, what does it say about us as a species if we opt to neglect a feature intrinsic to our design in favour of ones that aren't (like gluttony, greed, and apathy)?
It's been almost 10 years since I read it, and I've been thinking about rereading it again. (thanks for the reminder!) If any book has gotten me to think about things, it's that book. One of my all-time faves.
What I was talking about with acting on our emotions rather than cool-headed logic, is that perhaps when it comes to politics, keeping logic in check rather than getting carried away with emotions, that lead to acting on our emotions rather than logic, doesn't work out. It doesn't work out for the country. It doesn't work out in the forum settings when one carries that emotion onto a personal level, for sure, making a topic into a personal feelings and emotions and losing logic altogether. Somewhere there's got to be a balance.
But you've got me thinking about evolution and how we may neglect that natural empathetic nature. Certainly power, money, and ego have something to do with it. The artificial things… But I'm going to think more about that.
I just think that this topic is a perfect example of how our emotions can get the best of us, things are taken personally when they shouldn't be, and the staying on track is often lost due to emotional charge. The sooner we stop taking things emotionally personal, the better these forums can be. Again, this post is not meant toward anyone specific, and my words are just words.
Having emotions isn't a bad thing (and for whatever it's worth, one can feel and react, and not have it "get the best of us"). It's not necessarily tantamount to stomping feet and calling names. It can guide us, lend to insights.
I'd rather have that humanness enter into issues constructively. Seems like it did here.
Finally, yes it did.
Not sure if you've read Ishmael, but that book always got me thinking. If we accept that we evolve in ways that lead to our continued existence in this universe (like animals with defences from predators, trees with roots to collect moisture, etc), then the evolution to feel so deeply as we do is a factor in our continued existence too (i.e. the fact that we are inherently empathetic is by design, not coincidence). Then, what does it say about us as a species if we opt to neglect a feature intrinsic to our design in favour of ones that aren't (like gluttony, greed, and apathy)?
It's been almost 10 years since I read it, and I've been thinking about rereading it again. (thanks for the reminder!) If any book has gotten me to think about things, it's that book. One of my all-time faves.
What I was talking about with acting on our emotions rather than cool-headed logic, is that perhaps when it comes to politics, keeping logic in check rather than getting carried away with emotions, that lead to acting on our emotions rather than logic, doesn't work out. It doesn't work out for the country. It doesn't work out in the forum settings when one carries that emotion onto a personal level, for sure, making a topic into a personal feelings and emotions and losing logic altogether. Somewhere there's got to be a balance.
But you've got me thinking about evolution and how we may neglect that natural empathetic nature. Certainly power, money, and ego have something to do with it. The artificial things… But I'm going to think more about that.
Looking for a reply from Benjs.
Back on topic. (because cilantro rules!)
Fair enough!
I loved the book ISHMAEL. Quinn quite a bit refers to tribalism with its roots in pre-agricultural humans. Empathy, cooperation, mutual support are key elements of tribal communities. We could use a lot more of that.
“The fear of death follows from the fear of life. A man [or woman] who lives fully is prepared to die at any time.”
I just think that this topic is a perfect example of how our emotions can get the best of us, things are taken personally when they shouldn't be, and the staying on track is often lost due to emotional charge. The sooner we stop taking things emotionally personal, the better these forums can be. Again, this post is not meant toward anyone specific, and my words are just words.
Having emotions isn't a bad thing (and for whatever it's worth, one can feel and react, and not have it "get the best of us"). It's not necessarily tantamount to stomping feet and calling names. It can guide us, lend to insights.
I'd rather have that humanness enter into issues constructively. Seems like it did here.
Finally, yes it did.
Not sure if you've read Ishmael, but that book always got me thinking. If we accept that we evolve in ways that lead to our continued existence in this universe (like animals with defences from predators, trees with roots to collect moisture, etc), then the evolution to feel so deeply as we do is a factor in our continued existence too (i.e. the fact that we are inherently empathetic is by design, not coincidence). Then, what does it say about us as a species if we opt to neglect a feature intrinsic to our design in favour of ones that aren't (like gluttony, greed, and apathy)?
It's been almost 10 years since I read it, and I've been thinking about rereading it again. (thanks for the reminder!) If any book has gotten me to think about things, it's that book. One of my all-time faves.
What I was talking about with acting on our emotions rather than cool-headed logic, is that perhaps when it comes to politics, keeping logic in check rather than getting carried away with emotions, that lead to acting on our emotions rather than logic, doesn't work out. It doesn't work out for the country. It doesn't work out in the forum settings when one carries that emotion onto a personal level, for sure, making a topic into a personal feelings and emotions and losing logic altogether. Somewhere there's got to be a balance.
But you've got me thinking about evolution and how we may neglect that natural empathetic nature. Certainly power, money, and ego have something to do with it. The artificial things… But I'm going to think more about that.
Looking for a reply from Benjs.
Back on topic. (because cilantro rules!)
Fair enough!
I loved the book ISHMAEL. Quinn quite a bit refers to tribalism with its roots in pre-agricultural humans. Empathy, cooperation, mutual support are key elements of tribal communities. We could use a lot more of that.
One of my favorites as well. Use some of it in my debates.
I think we need to head Kat's subtle warning and get this thread back on track.
As much as I hate to admit it, The Republican party is not all evil. I know some very fine folks who are registered Republican. But the party is like a salad. When I was a kid it was fairly basic and there lots of greens in the party. Same with the Republican party. It once was populated with conservationists. For example, though not the perfect environmentalist, Teddy Roosevelt did pave the way to having much land set aside. But today, like the fancy salads we see now, we find some rather nasty ingredients like cilantro tossed in the mix which wrecks havoc on the whole party.
Boss Kat, please forgive me, the devil made me do it. (And if it makes you feel better, my wife loves cilantro too).
I see what your doing here Brian.Your Tom foolery and hijinx and hatred of Cilantro is very much appreciated.lol
So what do you think about what I quoted from Benjs, Brian?
As far as acting on our emotions rather than cool-headed logic... oh boy. I'm still working on that one. I get riled up too easily myself but I also believe I am good at looking at things logically. But there is probably a good reason I'm in the book business rather than politics if you know what I mean!
“The fear of death follows from the fear of life. A man [or woman] who lives fully is prepared to die at any time.”
I think we need to head Kat's subtle warning and get this thread back on track.
As much as I hate to admit it, The Republican party is not all evil. I know some very fine folks who are registered Republican. But the party is like a salad. When I was a kid it was fairly basic and there lots of greens in the party. Same with the Republican party. It once was populated with conservationists. For example, though not the perfect environmentalist, Teddy Roosevelt did pave the way to having much land set aside. But today, like the fancy salads we see now, we find some rather nasty ingredients like cilantro tossed in the mix which wrecks havoc on the whole party.
Boss Kat, please forgive me, the devil made me do it. (And if it makes you feel better, my wife loves cilantro too).
I see what your doing here Brian.Your Tom foolery and hijinx and hatred of Cilantro is very much appreciated.lol
LOL!
“The fear of death follows from the fear of life. A man [or woman] who lives fully is prepared to die at any time.”
I just think that this topic is a perfect example of how our emotions can get the best of us, things are taken personally when they shouldn't be, and the staying on track is often lost due to emotional charge. The sooner we stop taking things emotionally personal, the better these forums can be. Again, this post is not meant toward anyone specific, and my words are just words.
Having emotions isn't a bad thing (and for whatever it's worth, one can feel and react, and not have it "get the best of us"). It's not necessarily tantamount to stomping feet and calling names. It can guide us, lend to insights.
I'd rather have that humanness enter into issues constructively. Seems like it did here.
Finally, yes it did.
Not sure if you've read Ishmael, but that book always got me thinking. If we accept that we evolve in ways that lead to our continued existence in this universe (like animals with defences from predators, trees with roots to collect moisture, etc), then the evolution to feel so deeply as we do is a factor in our continued existence too (i.e. the fact that we are inherently empathetic is by design, not coincidence). Then, what does it say about us as a species if we opt to neglect a feature intrinsic to our design in favour of ones that aren't (like gluttony, greed, and apathy)?
It's been almost 10 years since I read it, and I've been thinking about rereading it again. (thanks for the reminder!) If any book has gotten me to think about things, it's that book. One of my all-time faves.
What I was talking about with acting on our emotions rather than cool-headed logic, is that perhaps when it comes to politics, keeping logic in check rather than getting carried away with emotions, that lead to acting on our emotions rather than logic, doesn't work out. It doesn't work out for the country. It doesn't work out in the forum settings when one carries that emotion onto a personal level, for sure, making a topic into a personal feelings and emotions and losing logic altogether. Somewhere there's got to be a balance.
But you've got me thinking about evolution and how we may neglect that natural empathetic nature. Certainly power, money, and ego have something to do with it. The artificial things… But I'm going to think more about that.
Sorry BSL! Totally lost track of this, as I'm insanely scatterbrained these days.
If I go by my own statement there, that every single piece of who we are is intentionally designed, then absolutely: logic must have a place in governance just like emotional response. Where we've failed as I see it is exactly as you put it: there's got to be a balance. Not only is there an imbalance in favour of pure logic, but society tends to ridicule those who embrace emotional response: hippies, beatniks, pacifists (like that's a bad thing) - how many terms are there designed to belittle the person who feels?
What's funny to me is that studies on Game Theory have shown that often once risk/probabilities are adequately factored into a decision, the best outcome of a scenario for one's self, is to act in favour of what serves the masses. Those with the power to make those decisions are all too aware of this, but their excess affords them enough 'chances' to take larger personal risks (or corporation-level risks) that pay off for themselves or their entities, and not the masses.
I think the first step is to be outspoken and to stop stigmatizing the notion of empathetic/selfless/emotional response: we should not be afraid to feel. Unfortunately, for those of us unafraid to feel publicly to have their voices heard, this movement must be widespread. For me, communism exemplifies the largest-scale failure of this.
Communism on paper sounds great - we work together, we reap the benefits together, we strive for equality. And while there are a number of factors why communism hasn't ever been long-term viable, I'd say a major one is greed. Greed from the formerly wealthy, which drowns out the formerly proletariat who collectively whisper empathetic concern for our human brothers and sisters (and trans-siblings if we're to be politically correct), bring the whole system down. That whisper must exist as an unwavering yell: when our resource consumption outweighs resource production, and when we have localized crops surrounding small percentages of the global population - it is inevitable that we will be taxed for doing the right thing if we're to bring any semblance of balance. It will fall on the masses to convince the fortunate few that charity isn't something optional - it's integral to our survival.
First we need to reconsider what we truly need to live. Then we need to observe how the vast majority of the world has a minuscule fraction of that. Then we need to disseminate the wealth. It's time to Robin Hood this shit.
As an aside, I'm fortunate enough to have been to numerous stunningly beautiful but horrendously impoverished places in the world. Each time I visit one, my reaction is almost exactly the same: if Albert Einstein had lived in Nepal, he would have died in Nepal and he would not have been able to share his ideas of the world. If Steve Jobs was born in Ecuador, Steve Jobs would have died in Ecuador and I'd be typing on a different (and inferior) computer. One article I read suggested that 80% of the world's population lives on $10 a day or less. How many people with minds fit to change the world lived and died in a rice paddy field, or picking tea leaves, or doing what ever was available to keep their parents alive?
The opportunity cost to civilization of allowing the masses to be born, stagnate, and die - is inconceivably huge. We're talking literally billions of people, out of whom one could safely assume several of them could change the world in unimaginable ways, if afforded access to education and paths to personal and economic growth. That can only happen if we (the fortunate few who spend our days on Pearl Jam message boards instead of towing soil for dollars a day) exhibit the empathy and selflessness necessary to help these people reach the stages that they can grow themselves.
So, going back to the beginning of this rant/message: logic likely has a place in our decision-making and governance, but emotion must have a place too.
EDIT: As an additional aside - cilantro all the way!
Post edited by benjs on
'05 - TO, '06 - TO 1, '08 - NYC 1 & 2, '09 - TO, Chi 1 & 2, '10 - Buffalo, NYC 1 & 2, '11 - TO 1 & 2, Hamilton, '13 - Buffalo, Brooklyn 1 & 2, '15 - Global Citizen, '16 - TO 1 & 2, Chi 2
EV
Toronto Film Festival 9/11/2007, '08 - Toronto 1 & 2, '09 - Albany 1, '11 - Chicago 1
Cilantro rules it has been in my diet since my kid days ....
Yeah love me some cilantro, onion, squeeze of lime on an authentic corn tortilla taco. Mmmmmm
Carne asada on thrs in Anaheim before the ducks/Flames game. Can't wait
You a ducks fan Badbrains? Because....uhhhh, I live in Calgary....and it would be fun to talk shit with each other.
Sorry I'm on the derailed train......yes, republicans are at war with reality. There, back on track
I'm actually a die hard Rangers fan, but I grew up in so cal. My cousin is a die hard Canucks fan so u can talk shit to him hahaha. Just going cuz I love hockey and we got tix for $65 each. I paid $160 last week for msg hahaha
the world, and this country is changing. republicans do not want change. they do not want the status quo to change. as a strategy, they lie and lie and lie and deny deny deny, as if being dishonest and being in denial will make the changes go away.
look at the changes since 2001.
we are war weary and do not want war. republicans have never met a war they didn't like. american has always been tight with israel. many americans are waking up. not the republicans. the majority of americans want gays to be able to marry. republicans don't. majority of americans want legal marijuana. republicans don't. a vast majority of americans feel that climate change is man made and want action on global warming. republicans don't most americans want religion out of politics. republicans want the 2 to be hand in hand. most americans want the super wealthy to pay more in taxes. republicans don't. most americans oppose citizens united. republicans feel that money is speech. most americans want abortion to be legal and convenient to have if necessary. republicans don't. most americans want an increase in minimum wage. republicans don't. most americans want wall street reform. republicans don't. more and more americans want medicare for all, or a single payer insurance system. republicans don't.
there are more, but these are the few that just popped to mind.
look at that list. republicans are on the wrong side of every one of them, and as a result, on the wrong side of history.
if you are a party who sees the writing on the wall in a changing world and you want to stop the change, what are you going to do? lie and deny and hope it goes away.
"You can tell the greatness of a man by what makes him angry." - Lincoln
Comments
What I was talking about with acting on our emotions rather than cool-headed logic, is that perhaps when it comes to politics, keeping logic in check rather than getting carried away with emotions, that lead to acting on our emotions rather than logic, doesn't work out. It doesn't work out for the country. It doesn't work out in the forum settings when one carries that emotion onto a personal level, for sure, making a topic into a personal feelings and emotions and losing logic altogether. Somewhere there's got to be a balance.
But you've got me thinking about evolution and how we may neglect that natural empathetic nature. Certainly power, money, and ego have something to do with it. The artificial things… But I'm going to think more about that.
I go back and forth on this. Sometimes I judge others for not having a clue what is going on beyond their own household fence.
Other times, I envy it.
I think the article is bunk, to be honest. comparing the current political climate in america to pre-nazi germany? that's a stretch at best.
I'm a little uneasy with people so easily dismissing an entire group who vote one way as ignorant or stupid or whatever it is you want to call it.
now where's that guacamole recipe......
www.headstonesband.com
and sometimes I really don't want to know how bigoted and ignorant my loved ones are. LOL.
www.headstonesband.com
Other times, I envy it.
I think the article is bunk, to be honest. comparing the current political climate in america to pre-nazi germany? that's a stretch at best.
I'm a little uneasy with people so easily dismissing an entire group who vote one way as ignorant or stupid or whatever it is you want to call it.
now where's that guacamole recipe......
Good post Hugh.
And I fucking hate Cilantro and Red Onions in Guacamole for the record.
And I fucking hate Cilantro and Red Onions in Guacamole for the record.
Cilantro is not a food. It's a weed. Yuk! Haha!
www.headstonesband.com
Hahaha that gives weeds a bad name! I think Cilantro is as useful for cooking as it is for smoking...
As much as I hate to admit it, The Republican party is not all evil. I know some very fine folks who are registered Republican. But the party is like a salad. When I was a kid it was fairly basic and there lots of greens in the party. Same with the Republican party. It once was populated with conservationists. For example, though not the perfect environmentalist, Teddy Roosevelt did pave the way to having much land set aside. But today, like the fancy salads we see now, we find some rather nasty ingredients like cilantro tossed in the mix which wrecks havoc on the whole party.
Boss Kat, please forgive me, the devil made me do it. (And if it makes you feel better, my wife loves cilantro too).
Back on topic. (because cilantro rules!)
I loved the book ISHMAEL. Quinn quite a bit refers to tribalism with its roots in pre-agricultural humans. Empathy, cooperation, mutual support are key elements of tribal communities. We could use a lot more of that.
If I go by my own statement there, that every single piece of who we are is intentionally designed, then absolutely: logic must have a place in governance just like emotional response. Where we've failed as I see it is exactly as you put it: there's got to be a balance. Not only is there an imbalance in favour of pure logic, but society tends to ridicule those who embrace emotional response: hippies, beatniks, pacifists (like that's a bad thing) - how many terms are there designed to belittle the person who feels?
What's funny to me is that studies on Game Theory have shown that often once risk/probabilities are adequately factored into a decision, the best outcome of a scenario for one's self, is to act in favour of what serves the masses. Those with the power to make those decisions are all too aware of this, but their excess affords them enough 'chances' to take larger personal risks (or corporation-level risks) that pay off for themselves or their entities, and not the masses.
I think the first step is to be outspoken and to stop stigmatizing the notion of empathetic/selfless/emotional response: we should not be afraid to feel. Unfortunately, for those of us unafraid to feel publicly to have their voices heard, this movement must be widespread. For me, communism exemplifies the largest-scale failure of this.
Communism on paper sounds great - we work together, we reap the benefits together, we strive for equality. And while there are a number of factors why communism hasn't ever been long-term viable, I'd say a major one is greed. Greed from the formerly wealthy, which drowns out the formerly proletariat who collectively whisper empathetic concern for our human brothers and sisters (and trans-siblings if we're to be politically correct), bring the whole system down. That whisper must exist as an unwavering yell: when our resource consumption outweighs resource production, and when we have localized crops surrounding small percentages of the global population - it is inevitable that we will be taxed for doing the right thing if we're to bring any semblance of balance. It will fall on the masses to convince the fortunate few that charity isn't something optional - it's integral to our survival.
First we need to reconsider what we truly need to live. Then we need to observe how the vast majority of the world has a minuscule fraction of that. Then we need to disseminate the wealth. It's time to Robin Hood this shit.
As an aside, I'm fortunate enough to have been to numerous stunningly beautiful but horrendously impoverished places in the world. Each time I visit one, my reaction is almost exactly the same: if Albert Einstein had lived in Nepal, he would have died in Nepal and he would not have been able to share his ideas of the world. If Steve Jobs was born in Ecuador, Steve Jobs would have died in Ecuador and I'd be typing on a different (and inferior) computer. One article I read suggested that 80% of the world's population lives on $10 a day or less. How many people with minds fit to change the world lived and died in a rice paddy field, or picking tea leaves, or doing what ever was available to keep their parents alive?
The opportunity cost to civilization of allowing the masses to be born, stagnate, and die - is inconceivably huge. We're talking literally billions of people, out of whom one could safely assume several of them could change the world in unimaginable ways, if afforded access to education and paths to personal and economic growth. That can only happen if we (the fortunate few who spend our days on Pearl Jam message boards instead of towing soil for dollars a day) exhibit the empathy and selflessness necessary to help these people reach the stages that they can grow themselves.
So, going back to the beginning of this rant/message: logic likely has a place in our decision-making and governance, but emotion must have a place too.
EDIT: As an additional aside - cilantro all the way!
EV
Toronto Film Festival 9/11/2007, '08 - Toronto 1 & 2, '09 - Albany 1, '11 - Chicago 1
PS - boo to cilantro!
Sorry I'm on the derailed train......yes, republicans are at war with reality. There, back on track
the world, and this country is changing. republicans do not want change. they do not want the status quo to change. as a strategy, they lie and lie and lie and deny deny deny, as if being dishonest and being in denial will make the changes go away.
look at the changes since 2001.
we are war weary and do not want war. republicans have never met a war they didn't like.
american has always been tight with israel. many americans are waking up. not the republicans.
the majority of americans want gays to be able to marry. republicans don't.
majority of americans want legal marijuana. republicans don't.
a vast majority of americans feel that climate change is man made and want action on global warming. republicans don't
most americans want religion out of politics. republicans want the 2 to be hand in hand.
most americans want the super wealthy to pay more in taxes. republicans don't.
most americans oppose citizens united. republicans feel that money is speech.
most americans want abortion to be legal and convenient to have if necessary. republicans don't.
most americans want an increase in minimum wage. republicans don't.
most americans want wall street reform. republicans don't.
more and more americans want medicare for all, or a single payer insurance system. republicans don't.
there are more, but these are the few that just popped to mind.
look at that list. republicans are on the wrong side of every one of them, and as a result, on the wrong side of history.
if you are a party who sees the writing on the wall in a changing world and you want to stop the change, what are you going to do? lie and deny and hope it goes away.
"Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
"Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."