EMAIL SIGN UP!
Most Popular This Week
- Wisconsin Bill Would Treat Organic Milk, Sharp Cheddar, Brown Eggs as "Junk Food"
- Patent Filing Claims Solar Energy ‘Breakthrough’
- Climate Change's 'Evil Twin': Ocean Acidification
- Disaster Capitalism Strikes as Hedge Funds Circle Near-Bankrupt Municipalities Like Vultures
- Ignoring Bee Crisis, EPA Greenlights New 'Highly Toxic' Pesticide
- Patent Filing Claims Solar Energy ‘Breakthrough’
- Wisconsin Bill Would Treat Organic Milk, Sharp Cheddar, Brown Eggs as "Junk Food"
- Climate Change's 'Evil Twin': Ocean Acidification
- In 'March Toward Disaster,' World Hits 400 PPM Milestone
- Ignoring Bee Crisis, EPA Greenlights New 'Highly Toxic' Pesticide
Popular content
Today's Top News
The Tiger Woods of Nations
We are the Tiger Woods of nations.
We've been very good at a couple of things for some time now. Things like commerce and belligerence. Or, best yet, commerce backed by belligerence. Things that involve a bit of testosterone.
For the better part of a century now, America has stood head and shoulders above its nearest competitors when it comes to the size of our military and the enormity of our economy.
We have also run (although generally far more poorly than our arrogance would allow most of us to recognize) an endless succession of wars over the past half-century, once again far more than has whatever country might be number two on the list. Think of it this way: We were at war for four years in Korea (and have had a huge number of soldiers there since, as well as in Japan and Germany), twenty years (depending on how you count) in Vietnam, nine years now in Afghanistan, eight years in Iraq, and throw in another couple for all the lesser affairs like, Panama, the first Iraq war, Somalia, the Balkans, Lebanon, Grenada, et cetera and et cetera. Even if we leave aside the constant military and covert interventions in Latin American and most of the rest of the world, nor the forty-five years of ‘cold' war with the Soviets, by my count that leaves the US with roughly forty-three ‘war-years' out of the last sixty-five since World War II (itself, of course, the granddaddy of them all).
In other words, this country has been at war for basically two of every three years since 1945. Ouch. Of course, there could be a plausible explanation for that. I'm sure that if you ask the likes of Charles Krauthammer or George Will, they would give you some nauseating line of dogma singing the praises of America, the indispensable power, the policeman to the world, the valiant protector of peace and freedom who steps up to the plate when all others cower and free-ride.
That may even have some truth to it when comes to Korea or the first Gulf War, though both of these are far more mixed cases than most Americans are aware. In any case, it is certainly a ludicrous proposition when it applied to the bulk of these wars, not least including our biggest disasters, Vietnam and Iraq (which were of course far bigger disasters for the folks living in those countries). In any case, add it all up and you get the inescapable reality of a country that loves war, its emphatic protestations to the contrary notwithstanding. Like the guy at the local bar who's always getting into fights, there may be a means by which to explain it away the first couple of times, but after awhile the truth is plain for all who will see it. Typically that will mean everyone but members of his own family. Likewise, most of the rest of the world sees who America is, even if we by and large cannot. Similarly, most other folks get that bravado and belligerence are ultimately signs of insecurity, not courage and confidence, even if we delude ourselves otherwise.
But that's been us, and - like Tiger Woods - we were pretty good at these exhibitions of brute strength for quite some time. And, also like Woods, we wrapped ourselves up in the clothes of the morally pious. America could never fancy itself as yet another great power, just like all the others, crassly seeking the promotion of its own commercial interests throughout the world, constantly willing to subjugate the interests and often the lives of people at home and especially abroad to satisfy that thirsty quest. Similarly, Woods was supposed to be the paragon of the great family man, upstanding and moral, clean and marketable - the perfect image of the wholesome America right out of the 1950s, even if the marketing guys privately lamented what a shame it was that he had to be half black (damn!).
The perfect image, as well, to sell a whole bunch of shit to people. Woods became little more than a marketing machine, a conglomerate of product-pushing, money-metastasizing, steroid-infused ka-ching ka-ching advertising for everything from expensive too-hip watches, to management consulting for fools, to all things Nike. This represents a third parallel between the golfer and the United States. Maybe once Woods was all about the art and prowess of golf. I'm at a bit of a loss as to why spectacular facility at knocking little white balls into faraway holes in the ground merits anywhere near the attention and rewards lavished upon it by our society, but hey, millions of weekend hacks out there love the game, so who am I to say what's worthy of our attention and what isn't? Moreover, you don't have to have a particular jones for golf to appreciate unparalleled skill at any particular endeavor, especially when it is the product of long hours and years of dedicated effort to master one's craft.
But Woods seems to have become far more the ubiquitous and hollow money machine of late than the dedicated duffer out on the links. Do you think he was some sort of expert on quality timepieces? Nah, me neither. But his face managed to move a whole boatload of Tag Heuers, I'm sure. Do you think he could spot an excellent business consulting firm as well as he could whack a drive off the tee? I sure doubt it. But I can hardly even remember a time when walking through an airport didn't mean seeing every other billboard there sporting a picture of Woods flacking for Accenture, an outfit which describes itself as "a global management consulting, technology services and outsourcing company ... Combining unparalleled experience, comprehensive capabilities across all industries and business functions, and extensive research on the world's most successful companies, Accenture collaborates with clients to help them become high-performance businesses and governments." Ick. Just reading that makes me feel like I need a bath. That smells a whole lot like the folks who help really rich people to get even richer, by turning first-world middle class SOBs into poor folk, and helping third-world governments keep the locals pacified while selling off the country to mansion-dwellers thousands of miles away, in London or New York.
In any case, doesn't this just seem like America's story as well? Once, we made stuff. Now, a massive chunk of our economy consists of nothing more than trading shares in things - or worse, lately, bizarre and incomprehensible schemes involving shares in things - an endeavor which creates nothing, which adds little if anything to our national wealth and quality of life on a good day, and which destroys people's lives and standard of living on bad days (like all the ones we've been having for two solid years now). William Blake said, "When nations grow old, the arts grow cold and commerce settles on every tree". How true of America. We seem to have scarce ambition and less ability at realizing what little ambition we do have these days. Whatever national spirit there once was has turned narrow, ugly and self-aggrandizing today, to the extent that presidents don't even dare call on us to do anything as a people anymore, even after a cathartic event like 9/11.
Raising taxes in absolutely unthinkable, even for Democrats. Compulsory national service might as well be a project from the Crusades era, as proximate as it is to contemporary consciousness (not that we've figured out how to jam a nation of fried chicken inhaling and soda pop swimming grossly obese kids into uniforms, anyhow). Even the slightest notion of sacrifice denting our bloated consumerist ‘standard of living' (which bears an uncomfortably strong resemblance to what you might get if you sat down and tried to design a standard of dying) cannot be considered, even for the purpose of mitigating the effects of the global warming crisis.
Unless, of course, it can be profitized. Ya wanna know when we'll really get serious about global warming? When some Wall Street weenie figures out a way to license to your government a carbon reduction gizmo, funded at taxpayer (that is, your) expense. That's when. Meanwhile, I guess people are just waiting for a proper crisis before they'll be willing to get up off their sofas and sacrifice even the slightest creature comfort. You know, a challenge far more dire than just the wrecking of the entire planet. (Which also just happens to be the only one we've got, by the way.) After all, it's only the lives of our kids and grandkids that are at stake...
This country has raised the killing off of golden egg laying geese to a high art form. Once we were the economic powerhouse of the world. But then the rich figured out that they could become super-rich if they had their taxes slashed, if they exported work performed by expensive American middle class workers to Thailand, China and India, and if they smashed organized labor. So they went out and bought themselves some Republican politicians like Ronald Reagan and George W. Bush to do the job, and when that wasn't enough they bought themselves some Democrats too, like Bill Clinton and Barack Obama. Then they bought off a stupid and greedy and frightened public as well, with bitty (and faux) tax cuts for the middle class, feel-good (until they didn't) wars against hapless brown people ten thousand miles away, and a whole out-group's worth of beat-up queers here at home.
Meanwhile, with the combination of massive tax cuts for the wealthy, a complete pig-out on government funds by special interests, military spending beyond the imagination of Curtis LeMay's angry kid brother, and huge new spending programs designed to benefit corporate bank accounts, the predictable thing has happened: We are broke and rapidly approaching a fiscal nightmare status that would qualify us for an IMF rejection letter. Accordingly, we have a physical infrastructure that is crumbling from neglect, a public political acumen of similar stature (a poll this week shows that two-thirds of Americans don't know what religion Barack Obama practices, and one-fifth believe he is a Muslim), and a set of national priorities that explain both. Today we're being told that we have to cut Medicare and Social Security spending, though there seems to be no limit to what we can drop on building the biggest killing machine that has ever existed on the planet. As we speak right now, schools - which we decades ago started funding with state-run lotteries (and if that doesn't say everything about our national character, I don't know what could) - have gone from slashing spending on music and arts to now literally just shutting down for part of the week. And when I say literally, I mean literally. Hawaii has just adopted "Furlough Fridays" as the centerpiece of its curriculum. Welcome back to the nineteenth century, folks. Maybe we can even do it better this time, since we had once before to practice. On the other hand, given the political spirit of our time, we'd be more likely to actually do it worse.
What a surprise it must be, then, to find that this country has slipped in ranked percentage of college graduates, from first in the world to twelfth, all in the space of one generation. Which is, coincidentally, the same amount of time that the US has been under the rule of regressive politicians and their radically destructive policies. Forty percent of young Americans have some sort of college degree today, as opposed to fifty-six percent in Russia, for example, meaning that we could all be forgiven for wondering who really won the Cold War. It goes on and on from there. Everything about this country fairly screams out "Decline!!"
And that collapse has been precipitous as well, which is the final respect with which we resemble the Tiger Woods saga. One minute you're ruling the planet, and the next minute some tawdry car crash scene in your neighborhood begins a process of unraveling your elaborately-crafted facade, revealing the lies beneath. One day you're unstoppable, and the next you're knocking over trees and fire hydrants with your Cadillac SUV, while every bimbo pop-tart from here to Kamchatka is claiming to be your mistress, and has phone message tapes to prove it. Your lawyers in Britain are going to court seeking an injunction to block publication of any sexually-themed photos of you (or even public discussion of what the injunction is about), while at the same time you're claiming not to know that any such photos exist. Your sponsors make clear that - all of yesterday's happy bearhugs and lovely yacht cruises notwithstanding - that they were only ever in it for the money. And since you're not money anymore, they are trampling each other in a stampede for the exit door. By the time it's all over, you can't even sink a two-foot putt anymore.
So it is with America. In 1945 this country was literally half of global combined GDP. Today we just create global recessions. Yesterday we had the biggest surpluses in our history. Now we are creating staggering sums of debt. We used to arrogantly control governments and peoples across the world, not least in ‘our backyard' of Latin America. Now they blow us off at every opportunity to do deals with China, which has just topped Japan as the second largest economy in the world, and is rising with a bullet, likely to beat the US a mere twenty years from now. Yesterday we held moral standing in the world as a (flawed yet still appealing) beacon for democracy and human rights. Today we're the folks who do Abu Ghraib, Guantánamo, renditioning, torture and anti-gay marriage ballot initiatives.
Our national fire hydrant moment, of course, was the Bush administration. It was conceived in the shameful stain of a judicial coup, performed by the highest court in the land. But that only turned out to be the high point of the affair. It all went downhill from there, as the Cheneybots wrecked everything of decency they could get their hands on, which ultimately came to include our national reputation. Massive debt, botched wars based on lies, drowned cities, total unpreparedness (at best) for a massive terrorist attack, torture, treaty shredding, civil liberties trampling, and the biggest economic meltdown since the Great Depression - hey, what's not to like about all that?
But, of course, our problems are a lot deeper still, remarkable as it is to imagine that eight years of Bush and Cheney are not even the worst thing that can happen to a once-great country. In many ways, the obamanation currently in the White House represents a greater depth of crisis for the national soul. Not just because the guy is so inept, and so completely ill-suited to his historical moment. And not just because his policies are so similar to George W. Bush's, right down the line. But, ultimately, because Obama and his party of whores represent a complete betrayal of the prospect for transcending our own national nightmare of self-inflicted stupidity. When the guy who runs on "hope" and "change" and "help is on the way" turns out to be absolutely just more of the same, where do you go next?
I don't know the answer to that question, but I know in my gut it ain't pretty. If you're not picking up an uncomfortably familiar whiff of Weimar Germany in America right now, you must have snorted way too much coke back in your wild youth and blasted out your olfactory senses. Obama's greatest crimes involve the destruction of viable solutions at a time of national crisis, and the betrayal of what remained of a well-intentioned national spirit when he came to office. It is, in many ways, the worst imaginable scenario - worse even than another four years of the Bush administration would have been. He has succeeded in discrediting progressive policy solutions by implementing regressive ones and allowing himself to be labeled as a liberal and a socialist, effectively defaming those ideologies. He has not only allowed, but in fact abetted the revival of the near-dead Republican Party and its policies of national annihilation. He has promised Americans a better country and a break from the destruction of the prior decade while delivering neither. He has mobilized a whole huge sector of the public - including, especially, hordes of young people - in Kennedyesque fashion, to believe in the power of renewal and the rejuvenation of the democratic process, only to deliver the comatose Eisenhower administration of gray business suits and diminished expectations, instead.
And so here we find ourselves, a country of the politically shallow, offered two choices in the voting booth: the downright satanic versus the über-craven - both of whom ultimately play for the same owners anyhow. And we find ourselves with a total lack of serious solutions to be seen anywhere across the landscape of viable politics, despite the fact that they are so plain and so obvious. Like some sort of desperate death junkies, hopelessly addicted to regressive politics, every time a fresh hit propels us into the inevitable intoxication-driven disaster, we go looking for yet another to help us hide from the results of the last one. And it's only getting worse, as the Republican Party seemingly seeks to test just how far to the radical and destructive right American politics can go before imploding altogether, and the Democrats hang their sorry heads and waddle along behind, too weak and too bought to even consider pulling the other way, let alone throwing a punch at the bullying thieves from the Pre-Cambrian Era.
It's so especially disconcerting because our problems are so frequently of our own making, which means the solutions are so transparently obvious, and yet we seem to be quite obsessed as a society these last three decades with making the wrong choice at every possible juncture. Here we go again, about to turn the government back over to the control of the very same monsters who just got done a mere eighteen months ago driving it into a wall at 180 miles per hour. Are Americans really so stupid (don't answer, please) that they can't see what that means for the next two years? As crises pile high, absolutely nothing will get done in Washington other than endless congressional investigations of faux Obama administration scandals, one after the other. An already embarrassingly cowardly administration will invent new and shameful ways to tie itself into knots of inertia, constantly trying to play defense against every tawdry new allegation coming from the likes of Orly Taitz or Sharon Angle. What Vince Foster was to the decade of the 1990s, Barack's birth certificate will be to this one. They'll have this guy raping white women before they're done with him, mark my words. And as the gravity of our multiple crises rises precipitously, the pettiness of our national politics will dive to new lows in inverse proportion. The decadence of American politics circa 2010 will come to seem like the golden age by comparison.
Whatever else there is to be noted about this country here and now, history will surely soon apply to us that most withering of condemnations: We are not a serious people.
That would be just fine, thank you very much, if this were a game of golf - even a Master's tournament round. But it's not. People's lives are at stake. Millions of them. And more. Even great ideas like democracy and respect for human rights may be seriously jeopardized if the America we once knew - with all its flaws in these domains - is reduced to a regressive cesspool of unbridled greed, global aggression and the endless debasement from cheap daily politics as practiced by moral midgets. For all of this country's many great and growing flaws, I don't want to live in a world where the political system and human rights regime are based on a model under the leadership of an ascendant China, let alone the House of Saud or the Taliban.
More is at stake here than just (just!) the implosion of life opportunities for one or two generations of people living in one country who represent five percent of the world's population, and who arguably deserve to fully own the product of their own stupidity. If the lights go out on the ideas of democracy and human rights in the country that was in many ways their leading exponent in the world for two centuries now - and especially if this happens in the context of a rising authoritarian China and/or a revival of violent religious fundamentalisms - it is not too much to worry about another dark age descending upon the world for a thousand years, covering it like a suffocating wet blanket. As if the whole planet were being waterboarded. That's a very heavy price to pay for satisfying Newt Gingrich's personal insecurities, feeding Sarah Palin's lust for cash, or ameliorating Glenn Beck's dry drunkard demons. I mean, there's only about seven billion of us or so getting the sharp end of that stick.
On the other hand, maybe we'll be fortunate enough to be put out of our misery first, stomping ourselves to death with our own massive carbon footprint.
Either way, all will not be lost.
We'll still have gotten our $237 tax cuts.
Comments
Note: Disqus 2012 is best viewed on an up to date browser. Click here for information. Instructions for how to sign up to comment can be viewed here. Our Comment Policy can be viewed here. Please follow the guidelines. Note to Readers: Spam Filter May Capture Legitimate Comments...


119 Comments so far
Show All"...If the lights go out on the ideas of democracy and human rights in the country that was in many ways their leading exponent in the world for two centuries now..."
According to my reckoning, the lights went out at least 30 years ago, possibly more than 40, and they were never very bright to begin with.
The USA has never been a 1st class democracy, it just pretended it was.The politicians know it and the country has devolved into institutionalized mindlessness, the inability and/or not knowing to discern thoughts, including the thoughts of others, from facts or truth. This is the result of at least 40 years to destroy the education system, a systematic plan by Nixon and Reagan who destroyed the higher State of California education systems. The purpose of the "no child left behind" is to indoctrinate official government mindlessness to children. The fact that mindlessness is institutionalized by business ads, which recites the government propaganda and churches with false doctrines, gives mindlessness legitimacy. In the Southern states mindlessness had a head start because that region has a history of anti education mindlessness.
The partial "pass" that Prof. Green would give to two of "our" wars, the Korean War and the first Gulf War have something in common. In both cases, the aggressor nations were told in advance by high ranking USA officials, John Foster Dulles to the North Koreans (see I.F. Stone, The Hidden History of the Korean War}, and Ambassador April Glaspie to the Iraqis, that, essentially, the territories that they wished to occupy, South Korea and Kuwait, were not of major concern to the USA. When each acted upon this apparent permission, they found that they had been set up for a fall.
Tony Vodvarka
God bless you, David. You are really on a roll that should be required reading for all of those revelling in self-imposed ignorance and materialistic stupors.
I would like to think that most of those with whom I share this piece of writing will be moved to try and do something about our sorry state of affairs. Sadly, I doubt that will happen. However, from what may seem like your one lonely voice in the wilderness I see a faint ray of hope. I take solace in that fact.
As I reflect on how poignant your words always are, I cannot help but wonder if your given name may not be somewhat prophetic. In your case, "David" is thrown into even sharper relief as you confront the modern-day "Goliath" of an evil so pervasive it has tainted virtually every decent aspect of our national fabric.
You do us all proud, and I thank you for that.
For a stiff chaser try:
http://www.opednews.com/articles/1/We-Stand-on-the-Cusp-of-on-by-Chris-Hedges-100318-294.html
And, at some point we will realize how fruitless it is to read these articles and comment. Precisely what they want us to be doing, sitting down instead of standing up. Words mean nothing to those in power. Laws are words. The change we wish for will never come from the ballot box. One does not wake up with more knowledge than before they went to sleep. The idea that Americans will "wake up" is ludicrous. At this point in time, with ignorance in no short supply, there is only one way for change to occur. But, I don't like the sight of blood. Good luck.
You contradict yourself by responding.
Can one not appreciate a 'smokin rant'.
a lazy, take on it all.......... I'm leaving this country. I always believed that the "right thing to do" was to stay and fight to make things, better. I find myself, now, too old and disenchanted to continue the struggle. I am outa here.
Yes, maybe better to stay in US. We don't, as a rule, bomb ourselves (there are exceptions, I know) so we are at least safer here.
Costa Rica used to be a nice little country without US bases, but they have recently agreed to allow US uniformed assassins into the country under the pretext of drug interdiction.
"don't want to live in a world where the political system and human rights regime are based on a model under the leadership of an ascendant China, let alone the House of Saud or the Taliban.
More is at stake here than just (just!) the implosion of life opportunities for one or two generations of people living in one country who represent five percent of the world's population, and who arguably deserve to fully own the product of their own stupidity. If the lights go out on the ideas of democracy and human rights in the country that was in many ways their leading exponent in the world for two centuries now - and especially if this happens in the context of a rising authoritarian China and/or a revival of violent religious fundamentalisms"
The House of Saud is a long time ally of the UK and the US. Allied with the UK since the tail end of the Ottoman empire.
And the Taliban was created by the US, with help from Pakistan, the House of Saud, and the UK.
The fundamentalists are allied with the UK and US.
The main reason the Soviets went into Afghanistan is that they feared Fundamentalism would spread from there and then into The Southern "Republics" that comprised the USSR.
This was also the main reason the USA fueled fundamentalism.
Britain helped found the "Muslim Brotherhood" in Egypt so as to keep Egyptians divided amongst themselves so the Empire could Control the Suez as they did In Iran to stave off Nationalism.
Israel helped found Hamas as a counter to the Nationalist aspirations of Arafats PLO.
These three countries, The UK, the USA and Israel are the most vocal opponents of "Islamic Fundamentalism" yet are the three Countries that did the most to ensure that movement grew in power and scope.
Now like "White Knights" they are going to rush in and save us. It reminds me of more then a few Hollywood Movie Plots but in those Movies the groups that do such are also seen as "The Bad Guys" by the viewing public.
GW NORTH: As usual, your post takes the big picture into account. Thank you. It's really an expensive modern take on the fact that the Cowboy movie invariably requires "Indians."
"If the lights go out on the ideas of democracy and human rights in the country that was in many ways their leading exponent in the world for two centuries ..."
Here's my challenge to David Michael Green: Get a map of the world and colour in each country in which the United States has not, in or after 1810, significantly decreased the freedom and prosperity of the inhabitants of that country, by military attack or what is now called regime change. Go ahead, I dare you.
Talk to Native Americans and Africans about human rights, makes the Taliban look like Polyanna.
USA exceptionalism tripe.
Is not nothing being done in Congress better than their doing evil?
Who cares if OilyBomber is impeached, be about time someone was nailed for something other than consensual sex.
Did not DMG say OilyBombers betrayal was worse than Bushes hachet job?
Throw all the BUMS out vote third party until there is victory.
Excellent essay that expresses what we have allowed to happen as we we were swept up in our unparalleled nationalistic hubris.
The one thing I disagree with is:
"If the lights go out on the ideas of democracy and human rights in the country that was in many ways their leading exponent in the world for two centuries now -"
What about the Native American holocaust that was on-going for those two centuries?
Anyway, I love the piece and will send it to friends.
It is no coincidence that the rise of evangelical born again religion has followed the same trajectory as the rise of the extreme right and the destruction of the educational system in America. From the time of the puritan extremists America has been under the spell of the most stupid and vicious forms of christianity which have alligned themselves with militarism and extreme capitalism so I fully expect to see a theocratic quasi-military regime firmly in place before too long.
This picture popped into my head after reading your great comment: 6 months after President Palin is elected in 2012, Israel has bombed Iran, and the US is put under marshall law, Palin addresses the nation. The camera turns to her, and we see...the opening of the movie Patton, except it's Palin in full military gear. Totally absurd, and yet we all know, totally not unexpected.
KANE: I hope you don't have the gift of prophecy! However, were your picture of the future to work, Mattel would first have to produce a dark-haired "War Action Barbie" to get that portion of the public ready for the real thing in the form of its new, kinder & gentler "commander in chief."
Upside down world in full view!
KANE and SIOUX,
Don't know if you had been following the Doonesbury cartoon strip. For a couple weeks, the strip featured a Sarah Palin action doll that was won by Sam, Mike's daughter. Your comments immediately made me think of it. Here is one of the best ones from that two weeks or so:
http://www.gocomics.com/doonesbury/2010/07/30/
Laugh out loud. I did.
It always takes a long article to encompass so many gripes and cater to regional projections and puffery of the "enlightened".
Our educational systems have not been destroyed by the republicans, its been a bi-partisan effort.
It isn't just Repubs and Dems that are suspicious of education. The American people as a whole do not respect it except insofar as it gets you a better job. See Richard Hofstadter's 1963 classic, Anti-Intellectualism in American Life for proof. Clear thinking, writing, poetry, scholarship have never been valued here; instead it's entrepreneurship, industry, marketing, risk-taking, and celebrity. It is odd--to think that a country founded by Enlightenment intellectuals became a country of know-nothing boobs. Or maybe it isn't odd at all--this "Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to breathe free" schtick attracted those people who had no education to begin with. We are what we are because of our past.
DROSERA: As you know, I perceive the world through the prism of the fundamental archetypes. I would venture to say that to the extent this nation sets its intents upon the bounty of other lands, it must retain the warrior as exalted symbol of heroism. The intellectual can usually see past the naked, primitive, xenophobic chants for war. Therefore, as is often noted in the actions of totalitarians (given their penchant for burning or censoring specific books), intellectuals are to be feared, or at the least, marginalized. Thus macho boys make boys who read books into sissies, and shame attaches to this castigation.
Writing poetry presumes feelings; and when a society feels, it experiences empathy. Again, that's a no-no to the make-war state.
When I began to study scriptwriting, we were told that we must create a powerful event in the first 2 pages (in screen time, 2 minutes) of our storyline. My boyfriend pointed out that there's been a constant upping of the ante as to what constitutes that powerful event. Films from 20 years ago are so much slower-moving than those of today. The original crash scene in a film like "The French Connection" was at that time considered daring and original. Today, most films include vicarious violence in more scenes than are necessary. In Hitchcock's films the violence was suggested, rather than graphically portrayed. It was thought that the viewer's own imagination would supply the terrifying visual links.
Just as a child's tastes can be molded to open the way for an acceptance of certain unfamiliar foods, the public's tastes are being molded to not only accept, but in a sense FEED off violence more and more. I have noted there's a parallel between this pattern in film/media and how much real violence the American public tolerates in not just its foreign policy. Racist events (as state policy) in Arizona, added to policing forces abounding in urban centers both suggest a violence waiting just beneath the surface to erupt at any moment. So much for security in our "homeland security state."
Recently I watched a 1940 movie all the way to its conclusion. I was astounded by the amount of dialogue. Actors delivered short speeches, back then. Did they mirror speech habits of the time? I don't know. Perhaps not. But the contrast between old movies and recent ones was amazing; seventy years ago, movies demanded so much more attention from their audiences. Now, visual effects dominate (as you point out above) and they must occur soon and often. The cinematography, I must admit, is immeasurably better now than then.
This tendency--to avoid nuance, intelligent dialogue, and a deep portrayal of conflict--may go beyond our national borders. When filmmakers get money, they will produce 3-D extravaganzas like Avatar, always emphasizing the flashy, the bold, the violent, the characters that mumble a few words to indicate their role in the thin plot that is being played out. It isn't just America; it is the whole world. Electronic technology--cell phones, computers, DVDs, videogames--lies at the root of this artless entertainment. We are getting dumber--not many people are capable of reading a long novel anymore--even if they would want to. I do believe, though, that there will always be a few of us always ready to read something good and write something good--even though our audiences might be sparse.
DROSERA: I agree that the trend towards "all NOW, all the time! instant gratification" has gone global, or nearly so. But few nations are as intent upon violence as our own; and it's bred into film the way sugar is added to just about every processed food item these days.
As for Avatar, it was a pro-nature film with enormous beauty, magic, and poetry. I would put it in a league of its own. My own regret is that I watched it for the first time NOT under "the influence." That will be remedied next time.
Have you ever smoked a joint? I mean it.
One of the most telling experiences of my life took place one night during my college years. SUNY Albany took the cream of the crop (the next niche were the Ivy League Schools, and since my father had 4 to put through college, in spite of my attaining scholarships, that was NOT an option) so everyone present was a thinker. There were about twenty of us sitting on the floor in a circle, and a few joints were going around.
The subject of INFINITY came up. The humanities majors, the types who understood things they couldn't prove in a test-tube, found themselves arguing with the science and accounting "types" over, dig this, whether or not INFINITY COULD BE MEASURED.
The linear types were absolutely convinced that infinity, as if a finite thing, could be measured with the right instruments.
I'll never forget that. In my mind it is one of the best illustrations of what separates the left brain types from the right brain types.
Feel free to comment, although I have a feeling you'd be in the "it can be measured" camp. Smile.
"The linear types were absolutely convinced that infinity, as if a finite thing, could be measured with the right instruments"
Sioux Rose:
This comment is not really related to the point you were trying to make, but there are "countable" infinities and "uncountable" infinities. Neither of them can be "measured." If you had crossed the river and taken a course in Number Theory at RPI the concepts would make sense.
SHEEP: I did my student-teaching in Troy, and for the heck of it, my college roommate and I went to some social mixer event at RPI. We found the guys to fit the absolute stereotype of nerds, and that was the end of that!
I admit, I have never been exposed to number theory. I do like the mystical revelations I've garnered from numerology, however. Numbers truly do represent their own unique world, and much of it seems to include the codes (or formulae) in which the manifest world is writ.
"To everything there is a number, and a time for every purpose... under heaven."
Sioux Rose
Your "take" on the guys at RPI was on the mark. That is why they were there. The grad student population when I was there was more diverse. Number theory would not have assisted you in doing numerology. In courses like that your feet don't touch the ground for the entire semester.
SHEEP: I was one of "the smartest kids in the class" in advanced math until we got to Calculus. Totally lost me there. Of course that was the last year of high school, I had already gotten admitted to more than one decent college, and I had a boyfriend. Plus I was passionately drawn into the anti-war movement. In other words, I could care less about school and did my share of partying. I don't know if I might have gone further with math; but fate had other plans for me.
I realize that number theory and numerology do not run parallel. I was just relating my personal experience with numbers.
Did you feel that the movie "A Beautiful Mind" did this arena of study justice?
I did not see the movie or read the book but I do know a little about the kind of work the guy did. Prior to retiring I was a geologist, but I read the math and sometimes the economics journals, looking for interesting approaches to modeling natural systems. Economists of his caliber are basically mathematicians, so it could not have been easy for the author and screenwriter to intimate what kinds of things he did.
Ouch, please don't ever lump science and accounting types together! :) This is just anecdotal, but every accountant type I've ever met was dry and humorless, uninterested in ideas, usually greed driven. Every science type was basically the opposite. The beauty of the science type is that they usually combine all the wonder of a pure humanities type with the ability to actually "make" (in a general sense) something useful. Like you, when I was in college got into many pot-induced discussions. Being the humanities type, I was always jealous of the science guys who actually had the smarts to take our ideas beyond talk, or at least try.
I still believe the person (or group of people) who will save the world is laboring away in some tucked away lab unknown to others, will probably remain so. But she'll come up with a technology so compelling that it will cut right through anything the elites can mount against it. She doesn't care about politics, about blogs like CD, but only about "finding out".
KANE: I have found your description to fit astronomers. When I was invited to lecture (on astrology) at a MENSA event in Puerto Rico, the dinner to follow had me seated next to the chief astronomer from the observatory in Arecibo. He had a manifold intelligence, a really cool guy. And I was also invited to lecture on astrology in The Cayman Islands. The "Food and Wine Society" sponsored me and an astronomer as we both offered our "takes" on things celestial. It was a lovely, enchanted night.
I will concede to you on this one. I have known some very open-minded psychologists and psychiatrists, all of whom appreciated insights as drawn from The Tarot, I Ching, and astrology.
I'm sure there are many truly poetic scientists who are so moved by their observations as to cross into the realm of Higher Love as a result of proximity to such wonders. Naturally any vestiges of arrogance would melt away into a Divine sort of humility.
Remember, I was relating an event that took place 30 years ago... maybe those I took for scientists are actually now engineers. Does that analogy work better?
And your last paragraph is touching.
Hmmm...should I share that I smoked a few joints long ago in college and even dropped acid a few times. I guess I just did! Am still coasting on those experiences. Don't know how a math major could ever claim you could measure infinity. Infinity is a concept: that there is no end to something--like the number of integers. However big an integer you can think of, I can think of one bigger--just add one to yours. So, I would argue your math/science types (which you speak of so pejoratively) did not have a grasp of infinity (though if you were cruisin' on pot, maybe you did not understand their argument).
Don't think the so-called right/left brain dichotomy sheds much light on human behavior. First-rate mathematicians are incredibly creative people. You know about the "thought-experiments" of Albert Einstein? Seemed like pretty right-brain thinking to me. It's just a different language--but one that rests on axioms and is therefore more constrained. Jackson Pollack's almost anything goes attitude doesn't work in the realm of mathematicians. And scientists have to work hard just to ask a question that can be tested. Not so with the humanities--a domain in which you can ask any question and speculate about possible answers. That is not to put down the humanities (not all "left-brain types" avoid good literature, history, and the arts), but to simply point out the differences between humanities and the sciences.
I like the tightness of science and math. Sloppiness in thinking never leads to anything good--either in the humanities or the sciences. Words must have definite, clear meanings. Ideas must be based upon a thorough background knowledge. Alternate hypotheses must always be considered and rejected for good reasons. Massive generalizations should be avoided. It is always valuable to stand back and look at explanations and statements from a perspective not anchored in a particular culture (I spent a long time studying Asian languages and have some sense of ethnocentrism as a consequence). All of these principles of inquiry apply to the humanities as well as the sciences. That is why the left- and right-brain dichotomy does not appeal to me.
Yeah, but she's so sweet in praising certain posters--you can't resist her charms!
DROSERA: Yoho seems to have a need to diminish the value of my ideas. That's the key mark of a primitive ego: presume you can feel better about yourself by putting someone else down (for what they do, live by, or believe in).
I believe there is a place for science, and I recognize that science can and does contribute much. However, just as the understanding of firearms has led to yet greater means of destruction, there is also a dangerous hubris associated with science. I feel that way about its inroads into biotechnology.
A spiritual parallel can be found with respect to Oprah pushing the alleged benefits of "The Secret." Here, some powerful esoteric teachings are placed in service to the "mammon ethos" of "I want more." In a phase where human demands upon the natural world are already leading to environmental paroxysms of overkill, offering the tool of yet more resource acquisition (and therefore depletion) is morally unsound.
It would be tough to find any astrologer guilty of murder or the champion of systems of resource mismanagement. Yet a few in this forum would like to play the role of Middle Age Inquisitors and render the astrologer the scapegoat for all that ails us, effectively burning our numbers all over again.
I will not have it, charm (LOL) or otherwise.
The fact of the matter is that I am a well-read, well-informed, and a highly intelligent woman who has devoted her life to the study of subjects most have never pursued. I am not asking for homage or demanding that others believe in what I have to share, merely that those with an interest determine for themselves if the ideas I relate in this forum hold merit.
To believe in the great mystical laws that defy human explanation (and measurement) does not mean that I hate science. When science makes false claims about my field, then naturally, I will be placed in a position to defend it.
And for the record, the majority of my clients are well-educated. A few are lawyers, psychologists, psychiatrists, and healers.
Yoho and Ezkile (along with a few others, who very well may BE these posters making use of multiple sign-on names) will not be content until they have my head on a platter. I feel entitled to spit on them given their savage efforts. I don't know if it's misogyny, that they resent that some resonate with the ideas I share, or their own rigidity that makes concepts that should inspire wonder, so anathema and threatening to them... and their evidently delicate, if authoritarian, ego-structures.
SR,
Lighten up! Your head on a platter? With tarragon and an apple? Most people enjoy your posts--you really nail certain points that come up. And you are intelligent and articulate. From some of the fawning praise I read here--a number of posters are a little bit smitten--or so it seems to me!
Astrology? If that is how you make sense out of the world, there is nothing wrong with it. As I have said before, it is a perspective that is bound by a particular culture--just as the I JIng is. I prefer something that crosses cultural boundaries. In Africa as well as Latin America, water is made of two parts hydrogen to one of oxygen. That quality of absoluteness attracts me. Not that mythologies aren't important. They are.
Avatar had wonderful visual effects, but the plot was simplistic, the writing poor, and the acting often atrocious. The theme--technology vs. the Noble Savage--resonates with some, though to me it represents a false dichotomy--either technology OR nature--a conflict that does rarely plays itself in such bare-knuckle terms. And the one side--that represented by the human exploiters--is not presented to audiences in any sort of balanced way: it's only this awesome race of Blue People with the power to subjugate flying dinosaurs vs. Mr. Combat Marine and his great machines. Give me a break! The Blue Folk didn't have marriage fuck-ups, disease, hatreds, dead-end work, murder, theft, and rotten teeth? Only in the minds of the movie's creators! Talk about nuance! That along with artistic integrity never made an appearance.
I am glad to be able to agree with everything you haave said here. Compare "The Third Man," with Richard Widmark and Orson Welles to one of the "thrillers" made today. The story was "told," not thrown at us with car chases. The difference may be analogous to reading a novel and reading a Classic Comics summary.
"In Hitchcock's films the violence was suggested, rather than graphically portrayed. It was thought that the viewer's own imagination would supply the terrifying visual links."
Good point. The Roman playwright Horace once said that "Medea should refrain from murdering her children on the stage."
We are what we are because of our love for capitalism. It has corrupted our democracy, our churches and our universities. .
But those huddled masses made sure that their kids got an education. So don't blame the immigrants.
"We are the Tiger Woods of nations."
I'd say we're more like Anthony Perkins in "Psycho".
Good one!
Sorry, I have liked some of David Michael Green's articles prior to this one, but I just don't get it. Tiger Woods is a golfer. As far as I have ever heard, he hasn't killed anyone, sold arms, or robbed people blind. He made a mistake or two or three and he apologized too. Doesn't sound anything like the US to me.
Maybe he meant to say the "OJ Simpson" of nations?
Interesting rant. And your solution is?
His solution will be to vote democratic in every election. DMG is a clever wordsmith, but he knows who writes his check every two weeks.
If he has tenure, he doesn't care who writes the check.
I like Mr. Green's rants, but he really can't see outside the current paradigm. After his valid attacks on both parties, he then concludes that Americans will return to the ballot box to install one of them back to power.
Why can't Green speak about the importance of a 3rd party to at least force the established two counterfeits into valid discussions about policy changes, given the direction that both have led the nation? With his background in history, he might find precedents for how the "outside team" manages to impact policy determinations in high places.
Also, Green doesn't speak about the sophisticated mechanisms that shape the public into largely a force of ignorance. Where is his rant against the control of media? The degree to which an insidious framework of fundamentalist churches has diminished the political acumen of its members? Even the impact of sports isofar as reinforcing allegiance to one's home team above all others.
His essays are always long, and he follows his own metaphor (Tiger Woods) through to it conclusion; yet he also manages to miss a great deal along the way.
I hate to bash the author, but I agree. Usually way too long––and boring. Nothing new and stating the obvious and he always backs the democrats when its feeding time. Me thinks he does more to solidify the democrats voting base than anything else (the lessor of the two evils). Many people like his work, though.
"His essays are always long, and he follows his own metaphor (Tiger Woods) through to it conclusion; yet he also manages to miss a great deal along the way."
In fairness to DMG, we'd all be here for days if he tried to cover the enormity of issues that constitute this gargantuan fuck-up called the United States.
3rd parties evolve from a well informed public..how can this happen when you have the current corporate media complex propagandizing the masses...that and their corporate radio liars have you voting against your own self interest..their faux populism by tea partiers supported by murdoch and fox news will never get us anywhere.