Subscribe to Common Dreams News Updates
Most Popular This Week
Popular content
Today's Top News
Killing For Fun; Military Madness
Killing is the key to success in military actions. Killing enough insurgents by invading and occupying US forces enables the winners to subdue and subjugate the survivors. The real winners in the Middle East are the US based corporations who seek to exploit the resources of energy and mineral rich countries like Iraq, Afghanistan and Iran. Also the corporate war profiteers of the defense industry are making out like bandits. They furnish the killing tools, the hired mercenaries and other wasteful and expensive materials, equipment and supplies for our never-ending wars-on-terror.
Mattis has a strong resume in the military killing business. He was a lieutenant colonel in the US invasion of Iraq in 1991, directed the Marines in the 2003 invasion of Iraq, headed the US assault on the Iraqi city of Fallujah in 2004 and helped design the siege that destroyed the city and killed thousands of Iraqi civilians. Mattis also commanded the initial troops that went into Afghanistan in 2001.
Describing his feelings about the people in Afghanistan, General Mattis said, "... It's a hell of a lot of fun to shoot them. Actually it's quite fun to fight them, you know. It's a hell of a hoot. It's fun to shoot some people. I'll be right up there with you. I like brawling."
Author Thomas Ricks wrote that Mattis told his troops to, "Be polite, be professional, but have a plan to kill everybody you meet."
During Operation Desert Storm in Iraq, Mattis reportedly told his troops, "It's the mission of every Marine in the battalion to send one dead Iraqi home to Mama."
Perhaps World War II Army General George S. Patton, Jr. is a role model for Mattis in his glorification of military madness and the joy of killing. Patton said "Magnificent! Compared to war all other forms of human endeavor shrink to insignificance. God help me, I do love it so!", and "No bastard ever won a war by dying for his country, He won it by making the other poor dumb bastard die for his country." Patton also said, "America loves a winner, and will not tolerate a loser, this is why America has never, and will never, lose a war." Of course that was before our ill-fated military ventures in Korea, Vietnam and Afghanistan.
Defense Secretary Robert Gates called Mattis "one of our military's outstanding combat leaders and strategic thinkers, bringing an essential mix of experience, judgment and perspective to this important post." Asked about Mattis's bloodthirsty rhetoric, Gates brushed off an official rebuke against Mattis saying it was five years ago.
In Afghanistan, US and NATO forces casualties continue to escalate. The number of Americans killed so far this month is at least 23 with 14 killed last week. In June, 102 occupation troops were killed including 60 Americans. 1,149 American soldiers have been killed in the war in Afghanistan, and countless numbers of Afghan civilians have died. We don't do body counts of "the enemy" because, as former Defense Secretary Rumsfeld said, "death has a tendency to encourage a depressing view of war."
Our economic crisis is directly tied to the cost of the war. It costs $1 million per year to maintain a single soldier in Afghanistan. The 2010 Pentagon budget is $693 billion, which surpasses all other discretionary spending programs combined--while our deficit soars. We desperately need money to create green jobs, rebuild our crumbling infrastructure and improve education.
President Obama replaced General McChrystal with General Petraeus as commanding general of US and NATO forces in Afghanistan. McChrystal had made derogatory remarks about Obama and his administration's conduct of the war. Petraeus was head of the Central Command and will be replaced by Mattis. Obama said, "War is bigger than any one man or woman, whether a private, a general or president."
The war in Afghanistan is a big loser. Rearranging deck chairs to include one more "fun to kill" military madman will not keep it from sinking like the Titanic. Only ending the war will save Obama.
A recent ABC/Washington Post poll found that people felt the war was not worth fighting by a 53 to 44 margin. An NBC/Wall Street Journal poll had 62% of the American people saying the country was going in the wrong direction and Obama's approval rating at 45% with 48% disapproval.
President Obama was the most successful politician in the US who seemed to enjoy being elected to the highest office in the land. Fulfilling his promise of peace, hope and change is a winner. However his failure to conclude killing for fun military madness will make him a loser in 2012 and doom his party in November.
- Posted in
183 Comments so far
Show AllMattis probably enjoys the smell of napalm in the morning, too. Or maybe just anytime.
This is now Obama's War...he owns it.
The oil wars are everyone in the world's wars. Except for the conscious waking up to Earth reality the pressures of these oil wars are providing to some, no one in Earth is benefiting when measured against the forgone opportunity costs. If someone is in need of a safe space and they get it by denying their place and contributions to the world oil wars, then fine, let them deny away and call the world oil wars Obama's War or Bush's War or whoever one wishes to deflect responsibility to(and thus respond ability: that's the main point here).
Interesting that George Patton said Americans never lost a war.
His father, a Confederate soldier, certainly lost a war.
You'd thing he'd remember that.
He probably figures who wins is what determines who the "real Americans" are.
AH. So Mattis would be the one who authorized the use of White Phosphorus against the civilian population of Fallujah. An act that violates the Geneva Conventions, and is a Crime Against Humanity.
Promoting an obvious psychopath and *admitted* war criminal to command in Afghanistan makes Obama complicit in any and all crimes that WILL be committed by this thug.
Non Serviam -I will not serve.
Bingo!
I'm guessing Obama wants someone just like Stanley McChrystal.
Right
O'Bamba is guilty of high crimes from his days in the US Senate when he voted to fund illegal wars, voted to violate the Geneva Conventions, and voted to override the FISA law which was carefully designed to function well in the direst of circumstances to protect privacy rights.
Due to these violations of the laws of the land, O'Bamba belongs in jail, not on the throne. That he sits on the throne today indicates the USan people's failure of their civic duty to themselves, to their children, and to their community, local national, and international.
When 100 million USans voted elite candidates in the 2008 elections, they voted for a continuance of elite grand theft of the people's health and wealth, through bogus healthcare reform legislation, massive bailouts for auto/finance racketeers/criminals, the greatest oil leak in world history, and escalation of illegal/imperial conquest/occupation.
It strikes me as odd that if I, an ordinary citizen, uttered the remarks attributed to the General that I would be locked away from society, yet he gets a promotion.
Well, if Obama keeps up with this fantasy about winning by invasion with bombings, attack drones, assassinations, millions of refugees and deciding what tribes and nations are worthy of peace and equal rights, he will be the loser and a republican president might be in a better position to do the old Viet Nam Boogie.
The peace movement helped the dems become the majority and we got more war for it.
The peace movement needs to become the third force that won't be suckers this time.
Plan for Peace
The peace movement did not help the dems, the anti-war movement did. In decades of activism I've met 2 people who move with peace(actually one, the other is a compilation of 2 people; no I'm not included here, but getting close). For in Truth Peace Is The Way, even at the front lines of war. Why? Because the human anatomical, physiological, energetic structuring allows humans to be the Great Transducers, but it's an inside job, We have the ability to swallow the forces of war and transmute them to peace; yes, even on the front lines(no I'm not there yet but I have seen and experienced some of the capacity). With WWII America swallowed Fascism, unfortunately, because there is no collective peace movement, only a collective self-righteously bleating anti-war movement, hasn't been transmuted, yet; thus humanity is left to wallow in catastrophic heartburn. Yes, plan for peace, and plan on "Being Peace" -- for Peace Is The Way For Optimal Earth Humanity.
This is what those who are in the Marines and the Army are trained to do and that is to kill. They are also taught to depersonalize the enemy. It seems to have always been this way, from naming Japanese Japs to encouraging the caricature of the Japanese as being blood thirsty savages. In Vietnam the Vietnamese were called gooks and dinks and slant eyes who were often characterized, as were the Japanese, as being sub-human. Now in Afghanistan, as it was in Iraq, the derogatory word of choice is raghead. All of these terms have been used in an attempt to make it easier for the American soldier and marine to shoot and kill the enemy. The American soldier and marine is trained to mechanically obey their orders and to act and react without thinking.
Marines such as Mattis apparently revel in the act of killing. Others, such as former Green Beret Donald Duncan, can sometimes reach an epiphany by questioning their role and that of their country which is what Duncan did when he was stationed in Vietnam. As Duncan notes in his book The New Legions:
"The process of changing a man into a soldier is brutalizing even if he never kills another, and sadly, the individual seldom recognizes his own brutalization, his changing sense of values. The process of changing a nation into a military society is equally brutalizing, and just as sadly, few of its people recognize the transformation."
Will the average American soldier and marine allow him or herself to become and remain like Mattis or will those soldiers and marines rediscover their humanity by becoming more like Donald Duncan?
"The process of changing a nation into a military society is equally brutalizing, and just as sadly, few of its people recognize the transformation."–(Donald Duncan), (Erroll).
–People here in San Francisco would be the last to know or even admit to this national 'transformation' that they contribute to when they elect their favorite politicians, the Neo fascist Dianne Feinstein and Nancy Pelosi, who as decent 'liberals,' and socialites, appear to be innocent of the 'brutalization' that so readily promote from their mansions.
No they are not in Kansas or Alabama, but it hardly matters.
The "military society' is complete in America even if some geographic pockets appear resistant or not directly economically connected to the malaise.
Yet the underlying psychology is all pervasive, however masked. We are continually amazed, but no longer surprised, how oftentimes this is revealed in people one least suspects. In a city where outward signs of military patriotism are sublimated, if not derided as déclassé, the brutalization is tacitly subscribed to, but kept at arms length for fear of appearing 'illiberal.'
All America now does is war. It is a collectively emblematic reality– in truth supported and manufactured by those so soignée, who in good company, would consider it a vulgarity to admit to it.
It may not be outwardly reveled in or pridefully expressed, but when one probes deeper one finds that Americans have already assented to and are even quite comfortable with fascism, all appearances to the contrary. Some even demand it, but not to be seen as 'ill mannered, would never tell you that.
The adage, "Scratch a liberal, find a fascist,"seems appropriate.
VASHKAR: I agree with your assertion that "All America now does is war." I would take it a step further to ask CD readers to note the military approach (what I term "Mars rules") as seen in the following:
1. The medical field treats the human body as a field of war. Most of its tactics include cutting away, poisoning, or sabotaging "enemy" tissue. There is slim to no education in the ways to assist our innate healing capacities.
2. Hollywood mass produces films about war, murder, police violence, international espionage, or the dangerous forces of nature. Even cartoons frequently depict violent storylines.
3. The virulent anti-immigrant policies being showcased in Arizona essentially declare a culture war against outsiders.
4. The "drug war" has done nothing to ease recreational usage. Instead it's set up a prison complex that's secured fiscal tentacles in every state. Inside prisons, rape is prevalent, which fuels the cycle of violence (both inside and out).
5. The war against nature: Nature's communities are experiencing the equivalent of a war declared against them: from the dismantling of genes, to the fracture under the Gulf of Mexico. BRUTAL technologies are inverting, and/or endangering countless ecosystems across the world. These incursions are led by global corporations that see life as cheap. Meanwhile hundreds of species are going extinct every month.
6. Class War: See the congressional record, and/or the latest insidious Supreme Court pro-business ruling.
7. War against women's rights: By using the ruse of "Right to Life," the fundamentalist Christians (like their Muslim counterparts) fully intend to block ALL reproductive services from women.
I'm sure there are others. My point is that beyond wars outside the homeland insecurity state, numerous wars are brewing inside its borders because war is the ethos through which every other challenge (or topic) is viewed... thanks to homage to Mars rules.
Posting deleted by commentator.
Americans are pigs, they deserve nothing but the worst luck
in the world , a big , large financial meltdown, plauge,
disease, disasters, fascist pigs for leaders,
any thing that is bad, America Deserves. Americans deserve
to have their houses foreclosed on, Americans deserve to go
hungry, Americans deserve to have to eat and drink oil,
A M E R I C A N S A R E P I G S,
F A T S P O I L E D P I G S
Hey, Baboon, I'm a Pig and I resent that!
Baboon - such broad generalizations deserve nothing. Attempt to identify specific elements of America that are "pigs" and then I will listen; cite situations, illegalities, constitutional encroachments, inhumane acts by leaders and Congress - I will probably agree - but to categorically condemn an entire country is the logic of a moron.
Hmm.. dunno here... I think Baboon is on to something. At least he/she spares us the endless drivel you ask for. We've heard, read and seen it all already.
At this point, cutting to the chase is good enough.
Hey, come on, BABOON!! This is too big a generalization. It's one thing to be angry at the powers that be, and a certain segment of the American citizen population, but to direct that anger at ALL Americans is over the top.
You do not know all of us, probably not even one millionth of one percent of us. You do not know how many of us are saddened by the ugliness of greed and war. You judge all of us without knowing all of us.
Hey, come on, BABOON!! This is too big a generalization.
The military industrial complex is a cancerous ganglia in the brain of the body polity and can't be removed without killing the patient.I believe one of the great ironies of WWII was to insert this cancer into the economy and politics of the US. The business of war is so deeply interwoven into our economy and politics that it cannot be removed by fiat. Districts send their reps to Washington to bring home the war dependent jobs.
Right ... its the War economy.
it doesn't have to be planned, it is on track ingrained in our Psyche about how our team must win... but thank Labraun James for debunking that one...
Peace must be planned and I feel it will take a huge collapse of our winner take all big corporate ruled system which is on track now before the new decentralized survival mode kicks in....
The defense industries and military could be tasked with a national emergency to plan and develop for a sustainable power and livable infrastructure for the whole population.
One and only easy thing in my vision is the collapse comes first (Could be more scary than we think)... all things must die for others to live and be born.
It is gonna take a new awakening after the collapse... and it seems like it is coming fast lately.
It could just be my perception.
"Districts send their reps to Washington to bring home the war dependent jobs."
Exactly. Sixteen bucks an hour on the line assembling drones and missiles. Nice work if you can get it.
Hey T+J,thanks for your good work.I believe the U.S. Army is the largest producer of video games like "Mortal Combat" (TM) in the world.The joy stick configurations in video game controls and the controls of military hardware from the M1 tank,to robotic drones ,have similar technology.Is there any doubt that the military would infiltrate the entertainment and gaming industries to pre-train an economically captive recruitment force of future "warriors"?
Abbie Hoffman once said, "If people were forced to eat what they killed,there would be no more wars."
I believe if the people in power ,who promote these wars of choice, were forced to fight them ,with swords ,hand to hand on the field of battle, face to face ,we would soon have peace.
peace
(for a former soldier site against war)...
a soldier's voice box reports...(from truth's cornerstone sentry)...
(he voluntarily joined and signed on with his life...
fulfilling his promise to serve...
but now all he gets is them turning their backs...
as they change that intent of their words!)...
(he's seen too much ruin for his heart to keep hidden...
or threaten his conscience to betray unfeigned integrity...
so while big shots defile those bottom lines of common decency...
a soldier's voice box reports from truth's cornerstone sentry!)...
"is this how a country like ours should be run?...
shall an army defend outright lies?...
is breath and blood worth less than dishonest men?...
whose con jobs bring further demise!"...
"watch all the tricks leaders' slick talk can do...
they'll pull big bucks from cheap knitted hats!...
then take soldiers' well-being and saw it in half...
and levitate lame excuses at that!"...
"they've staged fake events to be president...
with production crews setting up scenes!...
hence now when it's down to the real deal...
they're clueless to what truth even means!"...
"they treat fellow cronies like diamond mine veins...
donning kid gloves with gold-plated linings!...
while serial numbers become stock market quotes...
under disposable ticker tape timing!"...
"they'll trade off a sandwich for a businessman's lunch...
depicting top-shelf bread-winners themselves...
but food packet rations still cover that bill...
made by middlemen's credit-lined stealth!"...
"with grab bags of answers on hand just in case...
they've been fingered for treasonous crimes!...
it's reason enough they'll keep long lengths between...
thoughts on redress of grievance in mind!"...
"they refuse to convert retrograding determent...
though camouflage flaws lay decayingly plain...
to commandeer basic training's most honorable brawn...
through tour-dutied dirty work for their own shameful brains!"...
(had he not maintained that conviction of courage...
to keep his upstanding frame free from greed's shiny hasp...
this soldier might well have bought into high office...
among colleagues who value deception's wide grasp!)...
(but he's seen too much ruin for his heart to keep hidden...
or threaten his conscience to betray unfeigned integrity...
so while big shots defile those bottom lines of common decency...
a soldier's voice box patrols from truth's cornerstone sentry!)...
the best of wishes'n'ways'n'todays to each'n'everyone!... :)
I generally don't blame the soldiers for their behavior, their actions are merely a manifestation (one of many) of our society's mental illness.
You may wish to ask the Afghans and the Iraqis how they feel about the less than benevolent American military shooting their families and friends and seeing 500 lb. bombs dropped on their loved ones. The soldiers that should be praised for their behavior are those who finally see the light by speaking out and protesting against U.S. imperialism. Parades and medals should be given to them instead of the brainwashed robots who simply go along and meekly obey the orders that they are given.
I don't justify US soldier's actions. I don't have to.
Nor are they victims - except of their own weakness, their need to believe in something, and their delusion. But who among us is without delusion?
One can always question others' motives. But they are merely doing what they have been programmed to do - like any other worker in the hive. Those who are to blame are those who, knowing the consequences of war, sent the soldiers to wreak their havoc. The mentally-ill, that is most Americans, are often, apparently, not able to make responsible decisions. So perhaps democracy is not a healthy policital system for the insane anyway.
TIRE BITER: If your post was centered around a personal liberty/choice like whether or not to imbibe in certain drugs, I'd say it made sense. However, there is a great taboo, call it a line in the sand respected almost universally, that is crossed when actions lead to murder. This military "adventure" is hardly a war based on any remote "just cause," and thus its agents are participating in naked homicide. The military, particularly the marines (as I subsequently learned from several men I've dated), works very hard to break down that taboo... because KILLING is not natural.
I think you are too dismissive of the very act that defines us as rational, human beings. Your post is an apology for reckless disregard. The Geneva Conventions ruled that "following orders" was not a sound defense in war. Some in this forum (erudite history buffs) have made clear that to the victors goes the established narrative; and were that not the case, the assumed "law of war" might be described differently. The US hardly honors universal law these days in its rush to demonstrate homage to the god of death, disaster, and destruction... and that is NOT Jesus, contrary to the programming so many fundamentalist Christian enlistees seem to believe.
You are assuming rational choices from people who are mentally ill - the American public - which is my point. I suggest that we as a culture are mentally ill. We display all the signs. To expect rational decisions from irrational beings is irrational itself. Why is it a surprise that many of us behave irrationally?
I don't justify the military killing people. I just recognize it as a fact of the world and that it usually happens for all the wrong reasons - or perhaps for any reasons at all if you like.
Choice and action are what define us as human beings, but the consequences of most important actions are not as clear as you suggest. My post is a slice of reality - the fact that you see it as reckless disregard and not part of our nature seems somewhat dismissive of history. What is not generally part of our reality is that people take the responsibility for their actions.
Finally, I would suggest that violence - killing even - is very natural and part of human nature; as are altruism, sacrifice, compassion, peace, etc. Like most things, it is reaching a positive balance among contradictions that is important.
TIREBITER: First of all, I object to your blanket assertions about human nature. I have ENDLESSLY explained in these threads that a good deal of what passes for "human nature" is a DELIBERATE social engineering experiment that has put masculine values front and center. Patriarchal programming, beginning with the false assertion that God is a guy, has crippled the human race. I have argued it's the cognitive equivalent of directing a boat with only one oar. The boat circles, the pundits cry out, "Mark! History repeats," and that becomes the "evidence" of the land.
Human recorded history goes back only 3000 years. Other societies that did not demand worship of a punitive father god, or organize societal divisions on the basis of hierarchy (itself the result of flawed laws in place to allot access to only the privileged few) have existed.
The anger, rage, and intolerance have been bred into people as a result of so much injustice for so long! The fact that women only got the vote less than 100 years ago in this presumably-enlightened nation; or that Blacks were SOLD as human cargo... should tell us much about the flawed examples utilized as social contracts. Violence is found in these unjust social equations. It is not necessarily a dominant trait IN human beings. It is a natural response to the violence persons are expected to endlessly endure!
Qualities that are associated with feminine traits--like considering the other before one's self (Mothers MUST do this), seeking nonviolent conflict resolution, or backing away from aggression are NOT respected in societies that glorify the male warrior/hero. Men who take on the persona of caring negotiator are villified as sissies, girlie men, etc. That was not the case so much 40 years ago. At that time Hollywood showcased the thoughtful just man as hero. Today, he's little more than a muscular robot-style model expressing his virility through a dazzling arsenal of military-style toys.
Too many men in this forum completely bypass the sexist roots of modern civilization. Some will use examples of aggressive women to suggest that these crippled adaptations represent the truth about human nature. Instead of analyzing the ways that societies (for centuries) socialized both genders to adapt to twisted norms, glib generalizations about human nature are offered.
It was not that long ago that the church WAS the state, and ANY who disobeyed the strict rules of conduct was either exiled, murdered, or tortured. Several million women were burned as "witches." To avoid persecution, many adapted the practices of their times even knowing these did not speak to their hearts or souls.
Just because you THINK you're doing independent thinking today does not mean that the entire process has not been colored and defined by artificial human constructs of so-called society. There are jokes about recovering Catholics, etc. We are all in stages of recovery from centuries of oppression. Since I believe in reincarnation, it is impossible for any in this forum to be sure of their previous race, gender, religion or ethnicity.
Until we share a world where justice is truly for all, and economic systems do not just comfort the already well to do... we will see anger and rage. Killing is NOT natural. It is taught... anger at injustice is another matter, entirely. I'd encourage you to explore the meaning of what I've just related.
Jeez Louise, what a lot of baggage you carry around. Please try to divorce yourself from the extraneous and stick to the point here.
Please explain too how homo sapiens survived - long before your powerful male-centered religions/societies/institutions existed - without killing. Or did they just coax the plants and animals they consumed to give up their precious lives for them? I submit further that any analysis of nature will amply demonstrate that most of life depends on the killing and death of other life. It's a crummy plan if you ask me, but I didn't plan it. Please forward your complaints to the deity of your choice.
But I will meet you half way. I agree that who we kill is taught by those who teach such things to our children, though the act of killing itself seems inherent in the species. I don't defend it or revel in its power, I only recognize it. If it wasn't in our nature, I would argue that the species would have gone the way of the dodo long ago; but who knows?
My point was/is that we are a mentally ill society and can no longer be trusted to make our own decisions. It is because we are mentally ill that we manifest what you seem to abhor. I submit further that it makes little difference which sex runs the society; the policy direction will remain the same.
You claim to 'have ENDLESSLY explained in these threads that a good deal of what passes for "human nature" is a DELIBERATE social engineering experiment that has put masculine values front and center.' Thank you for your efforts and the sharing of your ineffable wisdom. Of this observation of yours I have a few questions. First, by whom is this 'engineering' being done? Second, why is it being done? Third, Is this 'need' or 'impetus' you suggest for this 'engineering' within the male psyche only - which you seem to imply? Fourth, Is it your contention that there is some kind of worldwide male consipracy to put and keep females down? How else would you explain its almost 'universal' application - unless of course it is (gasp!) a trait of the species (not that I agree).
And finally, perhaps people get so little satisfaction from your explanations on this site, and you get so frustrated, is that maybe your explanations are not very convincing.
Your questions require BOOKS (and these HAVE been written) in response.
I am not going to answer within YOUR framework. You seem to think mine is irrelevant, and again demonstrate your covert sexism... masked as intellectualism. It's a species of intellect that discounts anything outside of narrow (and in YOUR) permissable field of discussion.
Do you actually get any dates?
So your words are the golden fruit of cosmic law and my questions are beneath response. Typical.
Ooooooo, books have been written! Now I'm scared. I'll bet you think that because you write books you are somehow an authority. So what! I write books too, though I admit up front that I write fiction. No big deal, anybody with a pencil and some paper can write books.
You know, I can't make up my mind if you actually believe the nonsense you spout, or you're just playing along with the joke; 'cause you so funny. In every sense of the word.
By the way, shouldn't my social life be irrelevent to this discussion? Or are you titillated by the thought of it? If this pettiness is what we can expect from your emergence of the feminine aspect of nature, I think I can live without it a little longer.
TIRE: I believe it is a fool's errand to "argue" with you because you are stuck inside a paradigm that presumes it has the facts on human nature. I do NOT agree with your central assertion, so how is it possible that we can find common ground? When I say books have been written, I am speaking about feminist dialectic material. Can you honestly say that you've read Germaine Greer, Shulamith Firestone, Betty Freidan, or Susan Faludi?
I have an inkling of what it feels like to be Black in America, and that's because the White person (with rare exceptions) seldom seeks genuine empathy with what the experience outside of the contours of alleged norms feels like. That's my impression of your scathing lack of sensitivity for any issue that doesn't conform to the way white male academics call it.
JEEVEE: If that assertion smacks to you of superiority, so be it. Someone else here accuses me of negativity. It's amazing the characterizations one receives for not buying into official storylines about our culture.
I have spent a lot of time trying to expand the discussion in this forum. To hear someone argue that VIOLENCE is integral to human nature disgusts me. It's so clearly a reaction to political, religious and economic systems. Too many confuse the effects with cause.
TIRE: The comment about your social life was due to your Neanderthal level of sensitivity to the feminist perspective. A very spiritual source once told me that most men, in spite of any lip service to the contrary, wanted their little itty bitty wives... FEW can cope with a genuine equal, or Goddess forbid, a woman actually smarter than they are.
Now there are many things I am not up to speed with... one is all the groovy things computers can do, another is anything to do with anything mechanical, nor do I especially like history. But I do know a good deal about the mystical field having devoted over 30 years to it, added to exotic travels and meetings with some remarkable adepts of both genders.
I'll leave it at that. If you were honest, you might admit that the questions you posed were those tackled in books... for there are no simplistic answers. I streamlined my thesis, but you elect to return to your default position as per the inherent violence of the species. I'd rather talk to my dog.
Some female posters like Artemix could help deconstruct your erroneous premise... since it presumes what men do, and societies designed by men, speaks for what the feminine essence is and does. Perhaps she'll show up? Any other brave women in this forum wish to back me up here?
Re: backing up Souix Rose:
Yes, I see exacltly where you're coming from. I do agree that masculine is equated with POWER, and women with submission, and women who don't subscribe to that are weird or bitches, or some oher name. A personal experience might explain this better.
I wondered what it was like to sell cars, so I did it for 6 months. I really had a good time, but I made the salemanager very angry. He would scream at me if a porential buyer left the lot, and said I lost the sale!
I would say, no, I think they're coming back. He would say why, and I would say, because I wasn't trying to sell then a car. I was finding out what they needed.
It would really piss him off when they did come back and ask for me. Although, the weird thing about lots of car places is that a sales person is on all kinds of rotating shifts, and often when the customer came back, I wasn't on that day. The receptionist helped me out a lot too, because she would tell me who had come in and I would follow that up with a call to the customer to see if they were happy with the car, but because, it was a spit sale, although I did sell a lot of cars, I didn't make that much money.
The point is, that my way of selling was not about CONTROLLING a person and having them doing MY bidding. It was about finding and sharing a good experience for both the sales person and the buyer.
It was neither about "swinging dicks " nor "swinging hips, " but about relating to a person as a person. I did have a lot of problems there of course because of my style of selling, but I know that it works to go against the CONTROL AND PRESSURE to screw someone over to make a sale. You don't have to manipulate to score a win.
Now of course, all men are not like car sales people, but I do see this tendency a lot in males. I don't think that it's necessairly all genetic, but it's a social phenomonem too. It's very common in sports bars and all over parks when men are playing sports. It really come out with gamers!
When there's a lot of male bonding going on, that trait seems to come out, and I suppose that wars certainly bring out male bonding. ( or male torture like that poor raped lady held captive in the KBR trailer.) Although, ONE man did help here, but I think he was alone at the time.
Maybe all of that male bonding in a group is what drives the behavior of competition and strange behavior. BUT, if the people in charge are all males, then a mindset is set in motion, and it seems o.k. to look at every potential person that one meets and thinking, a la Mattis, "What's my plan to kill this person?"
I'm sorry that this was so long, and I realize that it's my personal experience, but it was a very unique experience, which certainly made me realize that I couldn't work there any more. However, several years later, when I bought my car, I got a really good deal and it was a fun experience too!
STARDUST: The personal experience within the modern context is valid and I appreciate your sharing it as it does reveal different basic styles. My posts are directed at the way society has encoded masculine traits as representing those superior to feminine traits, and this has gone on for centuries. It's a major part of religious training, very clear in the marketplace world (think comparative pay scales for men and women doing the SAME work), and a significant factor in academe. One key element here is the denigration of feelings, that decisions must be based on cold logic and/or cost-benefits analysis... and we know who benefits (elites) and what cost (everyman/woman).
Author Susan Faludi did a great job of explaining how the sexist nature of society influences the academic and legal worlds in her book, "Backlash."
When a few boys in this forum (I would hardly call them men), try to say that these examples belong to the past, or point out the few examples of aggressive women in politics, what they're really trying to do is derail any serious discussion of how sexism has impacted and wounded our society. When men can't love, when they need to take Viagra or watch porn to "get off," it means there are serious intimacy issues that give rise to these unnatural adaptations. When a man cannot own his feelings, when he's forced by a make-war society to distance himself from tenderness, mercy, empathy, and compassion... he becomes a ghost incapable of owning entire portions (the feminine ones) of himself, as these have been disowned. This sort of being, which society is in a sense creating, is dangerous to himself and others. He's also very useful to the make-war state.
Trivial discussions by a few morons in this thread intend to take the spotlight off the very real and still active factors that cause America to lean fully towards the make-war/Mars rules state. An understanding of these factors makes them feel very uncomfortable, so they use slander and patronizing commentary to try to make my points irrelevant or, in their twisted moral imaginations, ludicrous. They are anything but.
I think it's very important for people to get outside of their own experiences... to try to see the web of life and how personal experience reflects the experiences of countless others. Then one might ask what shapes the conceptions (those that become part of a consensual reality) of any shared social entity. Most of the women that "make it" in this "man's world" adapt to the pre-existing ideological structures. These are based on programs that were invented by men and forced onto society through all sorts of measures. The church held the power to murder people who did not conform to its rules. These designated the man as ruler of his home. People pretend that where they are now is all that matters, as if all the rungs in the ladder that got us to this moment can be nonchalantly ignored. (That comment was not directed at you, but the chimps in this forum who exist here on OUR tax dollars.)
> When men can't love, when they need to take
> Viagra or watch porn to "get off," it means
> there are serious intimacy issues that give
> rise to these unnatural adaptations. When a
> man cannot own his feelings, when he's forced
> by a make-war society to distance himself from
> tenderness, mercy, empathy, and compassion...
> he becomes a ghost incapable of owning entire
> portions (the feminine ones) of himself, as these
> have been disowned. This sort of being, which
> society is in a sense creating, is dangerous to
> himself and others. He's also very useful to the
> make-war state.
The same is true of women and I just got an example from this forum. Thanks Sioux for being that one.
I certainly did not intend to ignite a war of the sexes when I wrote this essay. It might be good for us to expend more time working for peace rather than fighting one another in this convenient forum on CD. War is such a glorified endeavor in the US that women, gays and other folks who were discriminated against by not being allowed to fight and kill in wars now fight to get in the military and kill like male warriors have done since the dawn of history.
Sir, you didn't ignite the sex war. SR is to blame. Some of us here don't understand her. If she had trouble with men in the past, then we're sorry to hear it but it doesn't mean starting another war against all men by twisting astrology to divide men and women. I don't like the way the killing is going and I wished that it could stop but while I voted for Nader, others voted for Mccain or Obama to keep playing with the military. When even the targetted minorities understand that definition of war that you just said, they will learn to give up their lust for vengeance.
I have been viciously attacked too so many times in my life, and who hasn't, but bettered myself against it without resorting to excessive violence or anger. Sioux is no threat to any of us, at least she isn't to me, but some of us don't see her consistency at times when she posts. We're just trying to help and she could at least return the civil favor. Regardless of who started what, there's no reason for her to get defensive and emotional. How come most people listen to constructive criticism but she won't? Disagreeing is not insulting one's intelligence. Saying that Sioux is always under attack is like the Republicans arguing for tearing up the Constitution by arguing that our nation is always under attack. I don't know about Sioux but I think you are much better in trying to help us understand her better, maybe even reason with her. That said, I think that she is mad at some of us who want to keep things down to earth and simple because maybe she was never given any appreciation for doing it in her life. I don't know for sure but I'm only guessing. Still, we all make mistakes and think differently because we're only human. If any of us reminded her of bad times in the past, then our apologies but none of us had any idea.
Justice, I shall post a separate post in response as this thread is collapsing by the response. Check out the response there. Thanks.
Thank you Souix Rose. Sorry, but my personal experience is all I had, never having been a soldier, but it seems like sales is an analogy for war, and then sports too becomes an analogy for war ( "They razed them, creamed them , trounced them, obliterated them..") Like the pillage of the Wall Streeters, it does get very tiring. It also gets very tiring when the Olympics gets the medal count right, but missed the point: excellence has no nationality nor gender.
The insistence on "WINNING" is in war and sales and in school yard fights. The TV show, "Survivor" celebrates the" winning at all costs "mentality. Mr. Turnipseed is right, about Starwars too...notice the language, " Let the "FORCE" be with you!"
In fact, Paul, the Octopus in the German acquarium ( the one that picked all 8 winners for the World Cup), well,
he received death threats! People were outraged when he didn't pick their team! Thank goodness it wasn't a female octopus.
I don't know much about astrology, but I do see more Mars than Venus in the world, and if the Mars way was the only way, then we would still be in the Dark Ages. There are Mars women and Venus men too, so it can be more in the mind than in the body, but the language of the world is most often MARS, and that affects everyone. Wouldn't it be nice if we could just ALL be Gaia People.
> TIREBITER is depressingly over generalizing human nature
> and our prospects, when clearly he has demonstrated a less
> than complete experience of it.
Tirebiter is talking from a non-spiritual perspective. I wouldn't call that overgeneralizing necessarily.
> TIREBITER informs us that everyone ( implicitly
> himself as well ) is insane.
Reading some of the comments, who can deny it? Even Sioux Rose contradicts herself all the time with her blame the male this and that on all bad things. Mars ruling isn't a bad thing when you look at the fact that Venus loves him and relies on him to defend her while maintaining law and order. Anytime we feel frustrated, it is normal to go insane. Mars drives people to be strong, courageous, and independent despite her on and off insanity from some of her posts. In a world where Venus rules, I fear giving up all that freedom and feel happy about it. What do you think a world where Venus rules would look like?
MARS Batch: You have a 3rd grade/3rd rate understanding of the planetary principles and the archetypes from which they are derived. Your attempts to try to use my comments in support of your own elementary understanding (or more frequent lack of same) is a form of theft.
Form your own opinions, genius. Let's see what you can come up with.
Whenever there's a thread about the dangers of militarism, or the use of rape in war... there you are, ever ready to defend men, the military, and the status quo. You appeal to the lowest nature of men in asking for their support, seeking to marginalize the very real and poignant points I raise.
Because so few understand astrology beyond the newspaper generic sun sign postings, you use that lack of awareness to mix all sorts of non sequiturs into the pot. Like your double here who said I was a "fraudulent" astrologer, as if either of you dingbats would be in a position to recognize the real thing from its counterfeit? There are plenty of phony psychics, as anyone can claim to have "a gift." Astrology is a complex system of cosmic mathematical equations that takes years to learn, no less master. And the wise among us continue to grow in our understanding.
There is karma incurred from defending stupidity, arrogance, and prejudice. For a female to point out the sexism in society is not equivalent to that female BEING sexist. Your nonsense about violence TO men (as opposed to THROUGH them, as it is men who have amassed armies with the few historical exceptions of female figureheads given power within entirely PATRIARCHAL societal formats) on a par with that which has been done to women is ludicrous AND deeply misogynistic. You don't even understand the concept as your thought process is that of a child, and not a particularly bright on.
A world where the Venus and Mars priciples were equally honored and held in balance would not be a world where the precious waters would be drilled to the point of species' extinction. It would not be a world where women were raped, and children sold into sex slavery on a routine basis. Nor a world where men were taught to use weapons; and with so many weapons invested in, there is the reciprocal drive to make war... just to "move inventory." It would not be a world where so many owned and carried weapons. It would not allow agriculture to enslave nature so that all trees would have to grow in uniform rows, and only one species would be allowed (a form of segregation applied to nature's intended diverse communities) to grow at all. I could go on; but believe it or not, I have a life and I find you tedious... I don't think you CAN be educated. You've been in this forum for 2 years now and where is any sign of growth? Your military training robbed you of an inner life. Shame, that.
> Your attempts to try to use my comments
> in support of your own elementary understanding
> (or more frequent lack of same) is a form of theft.
No it isn't. You don't have a copyright on anything.
> You've been in this forum for 2 years now
> and where is any sign of growth?
I haven't even made it to month 9 stupid. I saw your archives from 3 years ago and you're shrinking in tolerance, friendliness, diversity, etc... Enough with your personal babble.
> Your nonsense about violence TO men ... is ludicrous AND deeply misogynistic.
Typical of your posts.
> You don't even understand the concept as your
> thought process is that of a child, and not a
> particularly bright on.
You really hate children? Damn, I'm impressed. Everyone who disagrees with your framing is a "child". Why don't you just repeat Bush's "agree to disagree" phrase and be done with it? I gave you a simple disagreement and off you go.
> I have a life and I find you tedious
Your only life is trying to dominate the forums with your narrow minded talk and anyone who disagrees is your enemy. Could we talk about things we agree on? We would love to but that isn't what you want it seems.
> I don't think you CAN be educated.
I already am educated. I just don't act like a narrow minded knee jerk out of touch with reality.
"TIREBITER is depressingly over generalizing human nature and our prospects, when clearly he has demonstrated a less than complete experience of it. Doomier and gloomier than most, he provides us nothing but more bad news -- so why even bother to write it down ?"
First, I'm not sure why you see life as 'doomier and gloomier', I don't. It is what it is. It needs no excuse.
What I find so interesting in you 'enlightened venuses' (you and that Rosey creature)is your snap judgments without any knowledge of what it is you speak. For example, from what I write, where have I 'clearly demonstrated' a 'less than complete experience of it'? Please be specific if you can in least providing a reasonable rationalization for what you claim to know.
Further, you seem to claim the definitive answer to a question that has plagued mankind (personkind if you like) for millienia: nature vs. nuture. Congratulations. I'm sure the Noble committee will call soon. Our natures represent the raw clay and some of life's constraints, what we do with it is what we make from our lives.
"I am bothered that TIREBITER claims to believe in a laundry list of human characteristics, including altruism - while that is demonstrably at odds with us all being insane murders."
So do you think that people are all good or all bad with no nuance? All 'insane murder(er)s as you suggest? No balance of opposites? No free-will? No responsibility? I never suggested that. I merely suggested (apart from our wide-spread societal neuroses) that we are bundles of aspects - good and bad - that we variously express. That is 'human' nature. You invented the rest. How we express those aspects determines who we are, and for what we are responsible. It is a subtle distinction to be true, perhaps too subtle for some.