Thursday, December 21, 2006

Announcing a New 12-Step Program for the Left: Apparatchiks Anonymous

Once again, I find myself trying to write under a rotoviral sword of Damocles, as there is no way of knowing when His Majesty will wake up screaming and call me away to his service. In an odd way, it doth concentrate the mind... No time to spell check, however.

What an excellent question asked by James Lewis at American Thinker, Why Isn’t the Whole Left Neoconservative? It is such a discredited ideology, so intrinsically wrong, so inconsistent with human nature, so cruel and unworkable in practice, that one can only wonder at the persistent hold it has on millions of minds around the world.

Some day Leftsim will be rejoined with its twin ideology, fascism, which no one takes seriously anymore. Why is that? With the exception of nazi Germany, one could probably argue that fascism in practice was less harmful and more workable than Leftism. In fact, fascism is not a “right wing,” much less “conservative” ideology, but a competing from of socialism. It was the communists who tried to discredit “national socialism” by labeling it “right wing” merely because it wasn’t what they wanted, which was international socialism.

My own journey to so-called “conservatism” hasn’t been a journey at all. In reality, I am more or less the same liberal I have always been. It’s just that, over the past 30-40 years, liberalism has been hijacked by the Left, thereby becoming an illiberal movement. To cite just one example, when I was in college in the 1970’s, being liberal meant being tolerant toward homosexuals. To me this is a given. I cannot imagine otherwise. But for the Left, if you merely “tolerate” homosexuality, you are a bigot, something called a "homophobe." No, you must celebrate and even encourage it. You must never suggest to children that certain sexual arrangements are better than others. If my son wants to marry a man or a woman, it should make no difference to me -- just flip a coin, as it were.

Needless to say, I regard such “thinking” as not only devoid of wisdom, but frankly abusive, narcissistic, and unscientific, completely at odds with what we know about both psychosexual development and the soul of man.

To a large extent, classical liberalism strikes me as common sense, whereas Leftism is always both incoherent and incomplete. It cannot be enunciated in any philosophically consistent manner, and unavoidably truncates the most vital aspects of man’s being. Like Lewis, I wonder why my entire generational cohort hasn’t evolved in the same way I did -- why there is anyone my age (51) who is still clinging to the magical mythology of Leftism:

“After the Soviet Union crashed and no one could possibly ignore the bloody mess the Left kept making over seventy long years. So why didn't all the decent Leftists just read their Milton Friedman and grow up?” So-called neocons (i.e., former Leftists) merely saw "how wrong they had been. They grew up. My question is: What happened to all the others?”

Amazingly, surveys in such “liberal” places as Canada or Europe indicate that the majority of their clueless citizens regard the United States or Israel as the greatest threats to world peace. Lewis notes that in Britain, a recent BBC survey revealed that "the greatest philosopher of all time is considered to be... Karl Marx?  A hate-filled parasitical scribbler who spent his life in the British Museum, stoking the fires that killed 100 million people in the 20th century? What is wrong with British education that the plain facts do not shout out for themselves?”

Respectfully, I think it’s the wrong question to ask “what is wrong with British education.” Instead, I think we have crossed the line into genuine soul pathology -- not psychopathology, mind you, which may or may not be copresent, but a disease of the human heart. Indeed, I believe the heart must be diseased to embrace such a profoundly inhuman and anti-human ideology. Marxism is not human, but specifically demonic -- even, one might say, the quintessence of demonology, in that it is the the last word in fallen man’s promethian rejection of reality, whether it is economic reality, historical reality, psychic reality, or suprasensible reality.

One of the most salient characteristics of the Left is that it is peculiarly incapable of learning. In my lifetime, it has been ridiculously wrong about virtually everything, but it is as if facts and reality don’t matter. The same people who were trying to convince us of manmade global cooling in the 1970’s are now trying to convince us of manmade global warming. The same people who argued for our unilateral nuclear disarmament in the 1970’s and 1980’s are now telling us that it didn't matter that Saddam would have undoubtedly acquired nukes or that Iran and other terrorists are on the brink of doing so. The same people who successfully curtailed nuclear power plants in America are now insisting that we must be “energy independent” and that we are only in Iraq for the oil. The same people who argued that Reagan’s tax breaks would destroy the economy have, like everyone else, enjoyed the unprecedented economic growth of the past 25 years, and yet, still want to raise taxes. The same Democratic party that accommodated southern racists for decades continues to argue that race is all-important and that government should be engaged in the task of dividing people by race and gender and giving special privileges to some. And of course, the Democratic part is now the main repository and champion of mankind’s most ancient and vile prejudice, anti-Semitism.

Lewis agrees that “The fact that the Left never, ever learns gives the lie to all its high-falutin' claims of ‘idealism,’ ‘progressivism,’ and superior morality.” Yes, but why are they never blamed for their failures? Why does the bill never come due? Lewis provides one obvious key: the left "still controls the organs of propaganda.... Thus some 90 percent of our media functionaries are left wingers. A predominant percentage of professors and teachers are, too.”

It’s the same old Marxist idea: “who controls the past controls the future; who controls the present controls the past.” Lewis points out that “To hold on to their beliefs leftists must shut down any competing ideas, which is precisely what they do. Just take your favorite leftist friends, and tell them some obvious fact they don't want to hear. You can see it working right in front of your eyes: They just won't hear it.... As long as they control the dominant media, our society will keep teetering at the brink of destruction.”

One of the greatest conceits of the Left is that they are “intellectually curious,” “open-minded,” or “reality based,” when it would be difficult to find minds more parochial, narrow-minded, and self-enclosed than those responsible for the idiotorial pages of the New York Times, or NPR, or CNN, or virtually any MSM outlet.

It is even worse in Europe, where their press is not nearly as free as ours and there is little access to competing views such as talk radio. As Lewis notes, European thought is absolutely stifled by the Left, which "doesn't see any respectable alternative [to itself]..., since conservatism is constantly and deliberately confounded with fascism." And since these hidebound and intellectually inbred reactionaries live in such an echo-chamber, "if one fairy-tale of Earthly Paradise is seen to crash, another one must instantly take its place." Thus, "the commissars of Post-Modernism and Multiculturalism suddenly rose to power all over the West in the 1970s and 80s. The faithful had to find a new way to justify their idee fixe.”

Lewis notes the patent irrationality of this “mental fixedness,” and again wonders why they would continue “peddling the same toxins.” Why are they stuck?

Again, in my view, this is not a psychopathology but a pneumapathology -- a disease of the soul. This is why psychology is powerless to explain it or to do anything about it. In a way, it is analogous to addiction, another problem of the soul that psychology is generally powerless to alter. I don’t know if it’s the same way now, but when I was in graduate school, I was even taught that it would be unethical to try to treat alcoholism with psychotherapy alone. By far the most successful approach is the 12 step program, undoubtedly because it addresses the underlying soul pathology at the heart of addiction.

Perhaps we need a 12 step program for leftists, Apparatchiks Anonymous.

1. We admitted we were powerless over the intoxicating dreams of socialism, and that our lives and governments had become unmanageable.

2. Came to believe that a power far greater than our own omnipotent little egoic dreams of control could restore us to true liberalism.

3. Made a decision to turn our will and our lives over to the Creator and Guarantor of our Liberty.

4. Made a searching and fearless moral inventory of the well-intentioned failures and frank evils of socialism.

5. Admitted to the Creator of our Liberty, to ourselves, and in a live phone call to C-SPAN the exact nature of socialism’s wrongs.

6. Were entirely ready to have the Creator of Our Liberty remove all these defects of ideology.

7. Humbly asked Him to cancel our subscription to the Times.

8. Made a list of all races, genders, and classes we had harmed, and became willing to make amends to them all by realizing that these constructs are irrelevant.

9. Made direct amends to such people by switching parties.

10. Continued to take personal inventory and when we were again tempted to abuse ideology for the purposes of blotting out reality, promptly admitted it.

11. Sought through prayer and meditation to improve our conscious contact with the Source of our Liberty, praying only for knowledge of His will for us and the power to carry that out.

12. Having had a spiritual awakening as the result of these steps, we tried to carry this message to other Leftists, and to practice these principles in all our affairs.

In conclusion, it is hard to imagine a contemporary Leftist ever signing on to the program of this right wing religious fanatic and fascist theocrat:

“We observe today not a victory of party, but a celebration of freedom -- symbolizing an end, as well as a beginning -- signifying renewal, as well as change. For I have sworn before you and Almighty God the same solemn oath our forebears prescribed nearly a century and three-quarters ago.

“[T]he same revolutionary beliefs for which our forebears fought are still at issue around the globe -- the belief that the rights of man come not from the generosity of the state, but from the hand of God.

“Let every nation know, whether it wishes us well or ill, that we shall pay any price, bear any burden, meet any hardship, support any friend, oppose any foe, to assure the survival and the success of liberty.

“To those people in the huts and villages of half the globe struggling to break the bonds of mass misery, we pledge our best efforts to help them help themselves, for whatever period is required...

“To that world assembly of sovereign states, the United Nations... we renew our pledge of support -- to prevent it from becoming merely a forum for invective.... [er, a little too late for that. --ed.]

“Let both sides unite to heed, in all corners of the earth, the command of Isaiah -- to "undo the heavy burdens, and [to] let the oppressed go free."

"In your hands, my fellow citizens, more than mine, will rest the final success or failure of our course. Since this country was founded, each generation of Americans has been summoned to give testimony to its national loyalty. The graves of young Americans who answered the call to service surround the globe.

"In the long history of the world, only a few generations have been granted the role of defending freedom in its hour of maximum danger. I do not shrink from this responsibility -- I welcome it. I do not believe that any of us would exchange places with any other people or any other generation. The energy, the faith, the devotion which we bring to this endeavor will light our country and all who serve it. And the glow from that fire can truly light the world.

“And so, my fellow Americans, ask not what your country can do for you; ask what you can do for your country.

“My fellow citizens of the world, ask not what America will do for you, but what together we can do for the freedom of man.

“Finally, whether you are citizens of America or citizens of the world, ask of us here the same high standards of strength and sacrifice which we ask of you. With a good conscience our only sure reward, with history the final judge of our deeds, let us go forth to lead the land we love, asking His blessing and His help, but knowing that here on earth God's work must truly be our own.”

181 Comments:

Anonymous juliec said...

How tragic, that today voting Democrat and being a "liberal" means rejecting virtually every aspect of that great speech. I cannot imagine reading or hearing that and not having my resolve strengthened, my pride in my country reaffirmed, and my wish, though most certainly unattainable in my lifetime and perhaps never, that the rest of the world might follow our example renewed once more. Yet there are so many today, in this nation and in the west, to whom the body of that speech (outside of the popular quote), if they heard it, would be the worst, most vile anathema. Once more (this has happened a lot in recent years) I am both heartened at the resolve I see in today's neocons, and terribly disheartened at that other fifty percent, who would see the destruction of all that makes this country great and call it progress.

Yet another excellent post, Bob.
Thanks

12/21/2006 08:20:00 AM  
Blogger River Cocytus said...

That Kennedy knew how to give a good speech.

Actually had me, a 20-something, all teary-eyed.

Something happened, y'all, and it wasn't good.

I can see why people say 'I didn't leave the party, the party left me.'

Which contains a convenient pun.

More Christmas Thinkin'.

I especially love your paragraph about addiction-- I recently discovered that without a Divine Comforter we seek creature comforts in His place. Its nice to be comfortable, but that has become our staple: rotten bread and magic circuses.

12/21/2006 08:21:00 AM  
Blogger Jon said...

One point about the Nazis:

Why does everyone, including you it seems, only look at *half* of Nazi ideology?

NAZI = National *Socialist* German Workers Party

They were the far-right and the far-left all at once.

12/21/2006 08:39:00 AM  
Anonymous integralist said...

It is such a discredited ideology, so intrinsically wrong, so inconsistent with human nature, so cruel and unworkable in practice, that one can only wonder at the persistent hold it has on millions of minds around the world.

Before I finish the rest of your blog, I wanted to comment on this early paragraph before all of the One Cosmosians come in to congratulate you.

As a psychologist, Mr. Godwin, you should realize that this kind of polarization and demonization leaves you a bit unbalanced, and speaks more of egoic defense on your part than any actual "true objectivity."

I'm still trying to get a handle on your views and/or those of classical liberalism, but it seems there is an elephant in the room that no one is acknowledging or copping to, except as the expression of some kind of self-righteous crusade against the Evil Left (like a much more extreme version of Wilber's over-the-top, if largely true, castigations of the Mean Green Meme).

Now of course I could be wrong; I am always open to that. However, that would mean that Leftism was pure evil, was completely and utterly wrong. And I just don't see that. Maybe I will in time--maybe I will be converted here (maybe I'm just begging for conversion). But again, I'm going to stick to my highest vision of goodness, truth, and beauty.

And you know what? I see a lot of ugliness here, Bob.

12/21/2006 08:57:00 AM  
Blogger ximeze said...

Inter:
"Now of course I could be wrong; I am always open to that. However, that would mean that Leftism was pure evil, was completely and utterly wrong."

Yes indeedie, you're getting warmer.

12/21/2006 09:09:00 AM  
Anonymous GeorgeD said...

Integralist,

Isn't it uncanny how well Bob predicted your response over a series of recent posts? Truth is truth and that is all there is to it. Be on your way now sonny

12/21/2006 09:09:00 AM  
Anonymous Sal said...

Integralist -
We're still waiting for the idea of the Left that doesn't fly in the face of human nature, economics, history, science, etc.

Find one. Then we'll discuss.

Bob- hope the Boy feels better fast. Wash your hands! but you know that.

"Meditations on the Tarot" arrived a day ago. Know what I'll be reading for most of 2007. Thanks for the recommendation - it looks great.

12/21/2006 09:09:00 AM  
Blogger River Cocytus said...

Integralist: As Paul said: "Let us reason together."

Bob is not concerned with the appearance of unbalanced-ness -- which is a given when you reject wholesale a set of ideas, no matter how bad.

But the appearance and substance of balance are two different things. They may relate in that something that is balanced may also appear balanced, but just creating the appearance of balance does not make it so.

Note also that the ideas themselves are what is odious -- not the people. Very few Leftists of the giant lump sum are truly Odious.

My issue with your arguments is they are all very surface-oriented. Do you see what I am saying?

12/21/2006 09:16:00 AM  
Blogger LukeBlogWalker said...

Integralist,

While sitting here waiting for the plumber to show up and replace the water heater, I read your comments.

Sipping my coffee, I have this to say:

If my left foot is over the cesspool, and my right foot on solid ground, do I need to balance myself so I can stand over the cesspool?

Hell no!

Stand on solid ground!

I don't need to have "balance" with the cesspool that is modern liberalism / leftism. I need to gete both feet on ground -the obvious solution.

Worshipping at the altar of "fairness" read: coercive selfishness, hoping that someone might "love" me for being compassionate (albeit misguided) is no way to live life.

Too many bad a-prioris in there for me! Starting with, that I as an individual am in a subordinate position which is defined by the acceptance of others. Hmm, sounds a bit codependent to me!

Having started from this weak position, then the only hope is to arm twist others with whatever guilt or shame I can inflict upon them to get what I want.

This unevolved state, this juvenile personality state, is where most of liberalism lives. Insisting we be fair and balance ourselves with one foot in the cesspool.

-Luke

12/21/2006 09:22:00 AM  
Anonymous Uncle Crayfish said...

I read and agree with the contents of today's post. However, there are two nagging points that stick in my craw.

1. The huge lefty constituency appears to be rich, influential, and happy with their lot; there's no incentive to change. Is the leftist ideology somehow good at creating wealth, power and contentment? If so, such a system will be impossible to dislodge. Why aren't the lefties failing at business and life with their lame and diseased souls? The commies failed, why not them?

2. I'm stumped as to why our nation still buys oil from the Islamofascists. The first rule of warfare is to blockade the enemy and deny him resources and finances. Both the American left and right are equally guilty in colluding to keep conditions favorable for the enemy. Is it because we can't face life without oil? Or what? What is it that keeps us sucking up the crude?

You tell me.

12/21/2006 09:30:00 AM  
Blogger River Cocytus said...

Mr. Craw: The left/right 'constituencies' are not separate. We are both Americans and a rising tide lifts all boats. In this way, whether they are responsible for their prosperity or not may or may not make them prosperous.

12/21/2006 09:45:00 AM  
Anonymous hoarhey said...

Well done Bob, thanks.




integ,

Like all lefties, all complaint, no viable alternatives. And make no mistake, your fence sitting, lack of in-depth study and refusal to live in reality rather than the theorhetical, lends itself to the progression of the regressives. I believe Vladimir Lenin called such "poleznye idioty".

Here is another quote for you

"... Moderation in the pursuit of justice is no virtue, Extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice."

You see at an open mind as the pinnacle of humanity but when it becomes obvious that a political philosophy is dragging humanity back into the dark age it’s time to make up one's mind, to make a choice and take a stand Peter Pan. Bob is doing just that. After all, we do live in a cause and effect paradigm.
The ugliness resides in saying and doing nothing.

Try looking at your own self serving motives for calling yourself an "integralist" and I mean the real motives, you'll then be making a start. Those motives have been obvious to most here from your very first holier than thou post.

12/21/2006 09:52:00 AM  
Anonymous juliec said...

uncle c,
I can answer your first question. The reason there are so many insanely wealthy liberals is that they do not practice what they preach. They expect everybody else to live that way, but they consider themselves above it all. They favor higher taxes for the rich, because they can claim that they care about poor people, schools, the environment, etc., but they protect their own finances by finding the tax loopholes, so their own money is not confiscated. They give speak of improving public schools and complain about the oucher system, while sending their own kids to private schools. They crusade for the environment while wasting more resources in a day than most other Americans waste in weeks. In short, they are hippocrites.

There are relatively poor lefties, too. In fact, they are probably actually the majority. They are often the ones who benefit directly from various social programs: welfare, teachers unions, other social programs (I am related to many of these, and know whereof I speak). They favor anything that keeps the gravy train running.

The complete answer to your first question, then, is as follows: the very wealthy leftists do not practice what they preach, and are therefore not hurt by those faulty policies. The beneficiaries of said policies, however, are almost always hurt inasmuch as they lose the incentive to improve their lives.

12/21/2006 09:53:00 AM  
Anonymous juliec said...

doh! that's "voucher" system - though by the way the teachers' unions howl you'd think ther was pain involved...

12/21/2006 09:56:00 AM  
Anonymous Another Bob said...

Integralist,

Spiritual truth is not ugly,
perhaps there is something in
*your* eye?

-Another Bob (not *that* one)

12/21/2006 09:57:00 AM  
Anonymous will said...

Leftism is an addiction indeed, I think, an addiction to passion, specifically the passions of youth. Leftism is essentially Botox for the mind - and it freezes the mind into the same grotesque, unyielding mask that Botoxed faces often bear.

Of course, the retention of youthful passion is an aping of genuine "eternal youth", which can only be attained through spiritual transcendence. Again, the spiritual counterfeit, ie., the demonic.

>>the Democratic part is now the main repository and champion of mankind’s most ancient and vile prejudice, anti-Semitism<<

It always comes down to that. It's a fairly recent development in the American left - the Dems used to be staunch supporters of Israel. I think it means the American left is approaching critical mass, meaning: look out.

12/21/2006 09:57:00 AM  
Anonymous juliec said...

*sigh* Clearly, my fingers are too cold to hit the keys correctly. I'm really not that bad at spelling...

12/21/2006 09:57:00 AM  
Anonymous Another Bob said...

Juliec,

Regarding wealthy Lefties.
According to some observers,
many went left _after_ they got
wealthy, possibly as a compensation
for guilt, since wealth didn't fill
the hole in their psyche.

-Another Bob

12/21/2006 10:03:00 AM  
Anonymous will said...

>>I see a lot of ugliness here, Bob.<<

So integrate it, already. Make it all white, shiny, and clean.

No can do? Now you know the problem we have with leftism.

12/21/2006 10:09:00 AM  
Anonymous PsychoPrincess said...

Gagdad Bob, 'fess up: You really are Kreskin!!

I JUST READ Kennedy's speech not more than 4 days ago, I kid you not! I'm collecting Kennedy, Lincoln, Washington, Patrick Henry, John Adams, etc. speeches & written works to aid my research into Evil/Narcissism, also to ostensibly "support" myself with as I venture further into Spiritual Gangrene, becuz, as I'm sure many here know, as one scrutinizes & stares into the Evil Abyss, one needs much enCOURAGEment in order to not fall-in or fall prey to the natural despair, mind-boggling perplexity and gagifying horror engendered from working up-close & personal w/the poison & vileness Evil Is, even in lesser forms.

I'm researching and collecting speeches to be found for great men/women along with ones from Roman Emperors as material for a future book and as a component for my mega-work on Narcissism and the evolution of Evil, "SpirituoPsychoEpidemiology" as I call it, the manifestation, mutation, metastases & growth thru the centuries of Spiritual & Psychological disease.

"Pneumapathy" is Right!! Excellent way to put it.

[I still think there is "...no word in English, Elvish, or Orcish even..." to describe Evil accurately and its layers accurately enuf, even using Hebrew & Greek, for it is older than both put together.]

While evil is predictable, even banal in its ordinariness and repetitive braindead replication of itself, still its downright disturbing if not horrifying to see the Broad view of Evil, to see the Verticality & Horizontality of it as fully as possible...Lefties in true predictable format mostly never even make it to the first-view level becuz Denial & Deconstructionism "do the thinking for them" and they do not question it much less fight it.

As I read your post, I noted that my feelings ran the gamut, at once horrified to realize yet again that we are living in a condition more severe than Nazi Germany's concentration camps - made all the worse here due to the rampant collective Denial the Zombies subscribe to.

It seems to me at times Lefties do catch a similar glimpse of evil as we do; for they work so hard to deny it they MUST see it in order to deny it so well. But, in being horrified as we are (I'll be charitable here) they instead run AWAY from Truth and seek to create an alternate reality they can control & live in.

I've always said the Enemy gets the Sheeples to do his dirty work for him, and Leties or anyone giving place to evil instead of fighting it within them and outside of them are just the tailor-made, expertly designed Fool/Tool for the enemy to work thru.

In our society you can clearly see Evil at work as Leftism infects the ENTIRE Horizontal, like an invisible barely provable flesh & spirit devouring poison that marches on spreading and leaping from one paradigm along the horizontal to the next...

Mass Murder is the operative word and obviously is Evils goal. Genocide is another that comes to mind and is certainly on our Enemies agenda. It might not be Kool-Aid laced w/cyanide in Solo cups as with Jim Jones cult, but this SH**-swill people are imbibing ad nauseum sure tastes Sweeter to them than ANY drug, and draws the spiritually retarded worse than bees to honey or hippies to free weed.

It draws in everyone not fighting against it, almost inexorabley, no matter the culture they live in or the language they speak.

Thank You, G-BOB, once again for giving Voice to Sanity, witnessing so many f us think, have thought, are thinking...and see, also.

To read this post is at once sobering, horrifying and also encouraging -- kinda same thing I feel when I read Scripture.

Something deep within us gets rightly but painfully stripped off, the fog burned away when we finally do behold the by the Light of Truth/God the Monster in all its evil glory and power. It does everything it does by stealth, all it does is targeted to the elimination and murder of Truth -- its furious it cant kill God, so it goes for what it can reach to kill and devour and destroy. Yeah, Lefties, demonology doesnt exist huh?

If the enemy gets Lefties to kill/eliminate the belief in Absolute Truth, the Enemy will have no effective active opposition standing against him.

This matters to him as he has been steadily grooming his minions to produce this result & goal, and he does not take the time for waging this type of seige warfare only for it to result in nothingness.

When no stealth & darkness remain for Evil to cloak itself within, when all avenues of escape & avoidance are cut off from them/him finally, I hope to Hell the Light of Spiritual Truth/GOD makes the bastard and his rat-bastard offspring scream in freakin agony until they shatter from the pain of Light splitting & fragmenting them into a million little pieces, precisely becuz I feel empathy for God/Truth and utter hatred for the Evil/bastards.

And the Left "wonders" why we have hatred that they are too quick to condemn before they even try to understand it.

I'm realize I'm not a lone sentinel when I say "I Hate the Evil are & serve, spew, propagandize, promulgate and deny every minute of every day of my life. And I know I'm not alone when I say I Love the Truth we serve, speak, teach/share, witness, testify and stand for every moment we live and breathe every day of our lives.

When they see with utter sobriety what we see, stripped of the usual defense mechanisms they hide behind, if they ever get transformed by spiritual maturity, they will feel Truth that hits them like a 2-ton-jackhammer to the chest to realize somewhere within them just how fully we are engaged in this Spiritual Warfare they delusionally deny, which keeps them on spin-cycle in their diseases of soul.

Evil is not all we see & know. Love/Truth/God is also our Spiritual Reality - it has to be when you see the structured systemic Evil we see. A human beings mind instinctively reaches for the balance of "good", Light and love when confronted with evil that is beyond words to describe.

To not do so threatens to distort and twist ones very Being, heart, mind and moral compass, unless one KNOWS which Way True North can Always be found.

At least there are some who find their Way out of the hypnotic brainwashing and delusional denial of the masses, away from the Spiritual Bondage that most Lefties deny is happening.

May they find God/Christ, Truth, and Gagdad-Bobs Blog shining as the Star, beckoning them to come and learn, know and grow!!

!! VOTE GAGDAD-BOB FOR PREZIDENT!!

- PsychoPrincess -

Definitely feelin the need to sharpen her Swords today.

12/21/2006 10:12:00 AM  
Anonymous Erasmus said...

As an ex-leftist myself, I resonate with Bob's analysis, but only up to a point, for it strikes me as one sided to an extreme, yes, extremist in its castigation
of an amorphous body of opinion that contain many shades and even creative varieties. Leftism, when all is said and done, is eqalitarianism. Rightism, by definition, is a reaction to eqalitarianism, a defense of hiearchy. Can we be so outraged by the excesses of various shades of eqalitarianism that we fail to see that there is a healthy leftism, rooted our Judao-Christian tradition, attentive to the plight of the poor and dispossessed, and that there is also an unhealthy rightism, rooted in hatred and exclusion? The true liberal tradition, including Kennedy, a Democrat, recognizes this and keeps the leftist impulse in check, but also integrates it into the perspective of freedom. The pointing of fingers, which may I suggest Bob enjoys too much, obscures this. "If you remove the yoke from among you, the pointing of the finger, the speaking of evil, If you offer your food to the hungry and satisfy the needs of the afflicted, then your light shall rise in the darkness, and your gloom shall be like the noonday." -- Isaiah 58:10

12/21/2006 10:15:00 AM  
Blogger River Cocytus said...

As Pamela from AtlasShrugs puts it "The Jew is the Canary in the Coal Mine".

Indeed, Anti-Semitism is the first of the true poisons which come from the decaying corpus of thought. What is left is undead, a venomous zombie of doing and killing.

The fact is that the Jewish people-- whether they are taken Religiously or Ethnically, are exceptional. Partly it can be seen in how Jews run their own communities, from the teachings of the Torah, or whatever you wish-- whether or not Jews really control anything significant does not matter.

The fact is that the Jews are easy to envy. Really, really easy. So they are the first to feel the envy of others. Once this envy turns into a form of bigotry, then the door is opened for all bigotries to come in.

To wit, I'd say that the Jews have become Cosmic Canaries.

12/21/2006 10:35:00 AM  
Anonymous PsychoPrincess said...

ERASMUS:...Didnt you get enuf of Luthers finelyhoned thrashings the FIRST time around?

Who says only the Left cares for the poor or disposessed??

Wake up your amorphous brain and use it to see what you are obviously not seeing.

We know Absolute Truth is a given, and given that FACT, upon which we stand, we then proceed with our viewpoints and structures.

Leftists do not do this. They begin with Relativism, with defining 'truth' as THEY each interpret and agree/disagree upon and see fit or not. In other words, becuz they often CANNOT agree, they'd joined in agreement to dispense with Absolute Truth -- therein BEGINS the flawed structure of their particular "pneumapathy."

Don't hate us just becuz we use our spiritual eyes to see Reality instead of Denying Truth in favor of delusions such as you claim are "true".

We dont proceed from a relativistic base becuz it evidences "no truth ad nauseum" which is a foundational structural component easily identified in every single -ISM. Whats your excuse for denying structural truth even?

Becuz you know not of what you speak.

- PsychoPrincess -

12/21/2006 10:39:00 AM  
Anonymous Joseph said...

Though I agree with Bob in principal, I agree with Erasmus in fact. The on the ground reality is that many of the so-called "right" don't believe in classical liberalism either, and therefore, practice all manner of socialist tactics to undermine all kinds of things. Corporate welfare, which is one factor that continues our dependence on Middle Eastern oil (our continued alliance with the Saudis is completely undermining the "war on terror"), is an example of this blindness. Another example of our short-sightedness, was our propping up, in the 80's of the Hossein regime in Iraq. Many people cannot not notice these things, and therefore, in reaction, turn to leftism.

On the other hand, we know by harsh example that many laissez-faire capitalists will go to unbelievable depths of depravity to make a profit (see Deepak Chopra). It is easy to see, for example, why many trade unions were started in response to this phenomenon, as it is certainly not a part of the Judeo-Christian tradition to brutalize those in your employ, especially when family duty and desperation offers them no options.

Further, that socialist FDR made very clear decisions, most of which were economically useless, or worse, but had the effect of putting otherwise idle people, my grandfather included, to work on many useful and beautiful projects (in the Ozarks, there are a number of beautiful stone walls that my grandfather worked on). He also managed to lead us, because of his vision, through the war.

Bob, as always, is speaking of the big picture, it seems to me. The Leftism of the last 40 years, since JFK's assassination is simply diabolic, regardless of when they get something right. For as Will pointed out a few days back, their spin on any good idea is perverse.

This brings me to a question Bob. Is the phenomenon of globalization leftist or does it jibe with classical liberalism?

12/21/2006 10:44:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I see a lot ugliness here too, Integralist. It's you.

12/21/2006 10:48:00 AM  
Blogger River Cocytus said...

Erasmus: What God wanted was, not Altruism. If you take that scripture alone without the rest of it you might think that is what God wants.

12/21/2006 10:49:00 AM  
Anonymous Uncle Crayfish said...

In response to my comment about the wealth of leftist people, River Cocytus writes

"The left/right 'constituencies' are not separate. We are both Americans and a rising tide lifts all boats. In this way, whether they are responsible for their prosperity or not may or may not make them prosperous."

Well, here's the crux of the problem. Neocons cannot quash leftism if lefties are allowed to have money along with everyone else. The same goes for the Islamic enemy.

If you give $1000 and the family car to your rebellious teen on a Friday night, you would know that no good can come of it; the same applies for leftists and Jihadists.

Talk of defeating these people while at the same time allowing them to be flush with cash is absurd and futile. I'm not saying I have any easy solution--in fact the only workable solution I can think of is to seize the government and temporarily suspend the constitution while a political house-cleaning can be carried out.

As for the Islamists, if we want their oil so bad we should just take it by force, but for God's sakes don't give them any money for it; they'll just use it against us.

I know my views are ridiculous and extreme, but what else will work? Uncle Crayfish is boiled.

12/21/2006 10:50:00 AM  
Blogger Smoov said...

integralist:

"And you know what? I see a lot of ugliness here, Bob."

There was a time in the 1950s when many said the same of those who advocated relaxation of laws against miscegenation. Such laws were purely evil even though they were supported by a majority in many regions of the country. There was no point in attempting to "integrate" racism into one's world view. Racism is plain old evil whether it comes from "left" or "right".

What Bob understands--as do many others--is that the Left is in this same category. It has no redeeming value which could conceivably offset the huge amount of damage, delusion and suffering it has inflicted on our species.

That is NOT to say that all leftists are intrinsically evil people! (although some definitely are).

I was to some extent a leftist earlier in my life. I know many people who still are. Similarly I know people (mostly older) who remain racists but do have other redeeming qualities. I try to "convert" them into non-racists, but I know how to separate racism as an ideology from the people who are afflicted by it.

I hope you do "convert". You'll lose NOTHING you value, and you will shed one of the most unfortunate--and evil--forms of human folly in history.

12/21/2006 11:01:00 AM  
Anonymous dilys said...

Just a quick neutral corrective to Erasmus' offhand dichotomy:
The continuum -- in the US at least -- is usually, and better, stated as the Left overvaluing equality and the Right overvaluing liberty [certainly not hierarchy!]. Where on the scale to place the balance, for maximum benefit to the polity, harmony with the Constitution, and the health of souls, is always the subject for discussion.

[neutrality off]

Straw men like accusing conservatives of refusing to "offer your food to the hungry [beep: Norman Bourlag's work & Arthur C. Brooks' recent book] and satisfy the needs of the afflicted" is the wearying refuge of the leftist completely unaccountable to the sorry record of socialist and "welfare" policies in magnifying and reifying affliction for the afflicted.

12/21/2006 11:07:00 AM  
Anonymous Jimmy J. said...

Great post. Loved the twelve steps for Apparatchiks Anonymous. ROFL.

The Kennedy speech was a great touch. My, how conservative it sounds when matched with today's democrat rhetoric.

The fall of the Soviet Union. Why more people do not understand how truly evil that system was is beyond me. I was appalled in the 60s when college kids chanted their slogan of, "Better Red Than Dead." They had no idea what they were saying.

I recently visited Russia. Our guide in St. Petersberg took us to a huge, ugly cement building with a forest of anttenae on the roof. This was the KGB headquarters. She believed we would be impressed with the ugly foreboding look of the place. She was right.

Later she remarked that she was so happy because she now could walk or sit anywhere she wanted in St. Petersberg. She said with a shudder that during the Soviet period one could be shot just for walking or sitting in unapproved places. That statement made me shudder too and realize how fortunate we are to have the freedom that too many, especially the Left, do not comprehend.

12/21/2006 11:13:00 AM  
Blogger Van said...

An honest, healthy, well adjusted, generous person will naturally take note of someone who is hurt or in some way in need, and will as a result of identifying that a person needs help, do their best to help them.

This is the state of soul at the core of what the best of religious thought seeks to foster - not the acts, but the state of soul that ensures the acts will follow.

The leftist ideology realizes that they are not in possession of said soul. They realize that that is a loathsome thing, and wish to not be identified as such, and so do their best to con others into thinking that they are the person they know they should be.

They are on the horns of a dilemma. The dilemma is that they do not have that healthy soul, and so they can't consistently do those things the healthy soul does - but they want the appearance of having said soul in the eyes of others.

Well, if you want the appearance of something, but don't want to actually do what that requires, what do you do? Of course what you do, is put on appearances! Lots of them! And you do so where the most people possible can see those appearances! And best of all, you set it up so that OTHER people have to do the "dirty" (in your eyes) work of making you look good in Other's eyes (!), by using the power and force of the government to make those same Other's 'contribute' their time, effort and money to do what you wouldn't do, so Others will admire you for all you appear to do!

There are many people who ally themselves with leftists, because they themselves are good people, and are fooled into thinking that the leftist leaders are too, and want what they do. But it isn't so. They don't even want to do the 'good works' - always, it is the ever-present threat of identification in the eyes of others, of who they truly are, of Reality being discovered, which pains them, and spurns them on. Always and forever they are at war with Truth and Reality.

As integralist said this morning (in his defense if you can believe it), at the end of 12/19's posted comments:

"...it seems that you erroneously believe that there is a given and static world "out there" ...Or to put it another way, we see the world as we are, not as it is"

There deepest circular ring of hell, is that they are in a state of constant rebellion against reality, which puts them at odds with the truth, this forces them to always and urgently try to convince others that their lies are the truth; that their lies are 'true', which is the thing they oppose.

Astounding.

P.S. Gagdad - Apparatchiks Anonymous. Brilliant!

12/21/2006 11:24:00 AM  
Anonymous dilys said...

I think this has already been addressed, but the assumption in "polarization and demonization leaves you a bit unbalanced" is that the preferable position is always somewhere in between poles.

It is a useful way to train children, who have neither the thinking capacity nor experience to make up their minds accurately. But at some point the adult must say, "Here I stand. I can do no other." That, of course, is taking a terrible risk socially, and with one's soul. Martin Luther, who said it, must have been aware of both. But compromise was simply not possible as he saw it.

The Didache, an Ur-document in Christian development, begins this way: "There are two ways, one of life and one of death, but a great difference between the two ways."

Fulfilling the terms, loving God above all and one's neighbor as oneself, are subject to prudence, disagreement, and imperfect understanding (with the constant danger of idolizing "my way"); but the foundational idea is not, there are two ways and there is truth in both. That latter meme is for superficial measures, where pragmatism and cooperation dictate its flexibility.

This automatic almost unconscious assumptive splitting of even the possibility of The Way is an particular deconstructionist tactic basic to relativism, a black mirror of the Alchemical Marriage misapplied.

Some levels are one, some are two, some are many. Evolution gave us all fingers, and toes if necessary, in part to keep track. :-)

12/21/2006 11:33:00 AM  
Blogger Van said...

Joseph said... "The on the ground reality is that many of the so-called "right" don't believe in classical liberalism either, and therefore, practice all manner of socialist tactics to undermine all kinds of things."

To be sure the Republicans, even the conservative ones are but a pale imitation of Classical Liberalism.

"...Further, that socialist FDR made very clear decisions, most of which were economically useless, or worse, but had the effect of putting otherwise idle people, my grandfather included..."

Mine too, but oh, at what a cost - the dollars being the least of the bill. Look at the iliberals of today - they owe their 'legitmacy' and numbers, to those perceived 'goods'.

As always, as Bastiat saw, the cost is rarely what is seen, but what is unseen.

12/21/2006 11:34:00 AM  
Blogger LukeBlogWalker said...

"Leftism, when all is said and done, is eqalitarianism. Rightism, by definition, is a reaction to eqalitarianism, a defense of hiearchy."

Horsefeathers!

In the classic sense, perhaps a bit, in the vein of John Locke, etc. which had influences in founding this nation.

As for contemporary Leftism, it does not want equality, it wants what other people earn. It wants more than is due, for nothing but whining and complaining and manufactured victim status.

Which said status, it makes attempt at codification by law and the bench, since it cannot always succeed in other areas which are constitutionally established.

(See Mark Levin's book, "Men in Black")

And it all sounded so elegant and educated coming out of your keyboard too. ;)

-Luke

12/21/2006 11:36:00 AM  
Blogger dicentra63 said...

Leftism, when all is said and done, is eqalitarianism [sic]. Rightism, by definition, is a reaction to eqalitarianism [sic], a defense of hiearchy [sic].

The definitions you're using do not apply to this situation. In prime-divider societies, the "liberals" are indeed those who want to make things fairer economically and politically, while the conservatives are those who want to preserve the status quo, which benefits them tremendously at the expense of all the rest.

Look around you, though: do we live in a prime-divider society? If you say we do, you have no concept of history and no perspective. You need to spend some time in a third-world country and live among its citizens, as I have (not gawk around like a tourist), to get an idea of where the US stands.

Leftism is now based on the Marxist world view (which is much more than wealth redistribution) and postmodernism, whereas Classical Liberalism is based on the Enlightenment. This has nothing to do with hierarchies or egalitarianism.

You guys are missing the point. Bob quoted JFK's inauguration speech to express what classical liberals believe, which is that this nation is not evil and that it's worth fighting for, even to the point of war.

Currently, the Left believes that this nation is not worth fighting for, and that we deserve to be taken down a peg or two if not entirely. It believes that war is always wrong, regardless of whom we're fighting.

That is what this fight between the dextrosphere and sinistrosphere is about, not about economics or tradition or racism or the status quo.

We believe that you damned fools are going to get us all killed. That's where the "vitriol" comes from.

And Integralist, what did I tell you about reacting to tone over substance? Besides, tone is in the ear of the listener, not an objective measurement.

Please, if you can, tell us what is objectionable about JFK's inaugural speech? If you agree with all of it, congratulations! You're a classical liberal.

And now it came to pass that after I had made an end of speaking to my brethren, behold they said unto me: Thou hast declared unto us hard things, more than we are able to bear.

And it came to pass that I said unto them that I knew that I had spoken hard things against the wicked, according to the truth; and the righteous have I justified, and testified that they should be lifted up at the last day; wherefore, the guilty taketh the truth to be hard, for it cutteth them to the very center.

12/21/2006 11:37:00 AM  
Blogger LukeBlogWalker said...

..and lest someone think I am an idiot, I know the Judicial is a branch of the government. The problem is activist judges who redefine reality on the fly.

-Luke

12/21/2006 11:41:00 AM  
Blogger ximeze said...

Bob said:
"I think it’s the wrong question to ask “what is wrong with British education." Instead, I think we have crossed the line into genuine soul pathology -- not psychopathology, mind you, which may or may not be copresent, but a disease of the human heart."

"this is not a psychopathology but a pneumapathology -- a disease of the soul."

Oh goodie, another chance to get in a plug for my beloved Theodore Dalrymple: physician & shrink to the "underclass" of Britain.

TD is clear minded & very funny.
Has plenty to say about the state of American (we're in better shape!)

Three of his books address very much the themes of today's post:

Life at the Bottom: The Worldview That Makes the Underclass

Our Culture, What's Left of It: The Mandarins and the Masses

Romancing Opiates: Pharmacological Lies and the Addiction Bureaucracy

The intro to this last one has a great story, reminiscent of Our Fearless Leader's experience of PC ingrained in his profession, related in past posts.

Essays (search "old" website):

http://www.newcriterion.com/

Interviews:

http://www.brusselsjournal.com/node/1345

http://www.brusselsjournal.com/node/1721

12/21/2006 11:46:00 AM  
Anonymous Joseph said...

Van,
I think we agree, but sometimes, it seems to me, the facts on the ground are more expedient than the long-term, or rather, sometimes, when you have the power to do so, you must do something.

Take my grandfather. He was raised a farmer. He was in his early twenties, without sufficient means to support his young family, during the depression. He learned the craft of stone masonry, by virtue of the WPA. This led to work, and the learning of more skills after the war. In the little valley where he lived, he became reknown as a master home builder, and was able to send some of his children to college and others he taught his trade. I would suggest that this same story could be told over and over again by countless people, and yet it won't quite figure in to the numbers. That people use this example of FDR as fodder for their own twisted mill is beside the point.

Dicentra,
With all due respect, please spare us the Book of Mormon quotes, or I will tear that building down, figuratively, that is.

12/21/2006 11:49:00 AM  
Blogger dicentra63 said...

2. I'm stumped as to why our nation still buys oil from the Islamofascists. The first rule of warfare is to blockade the enemy and deny him resources and finances. ... Is it because we can't face life without oil? Or what? What is it that keeps us sucking up the crude?

The US gets most of its petroleum from the Western hemisphere: only about 15% comes from the ME (which means that if we were really interested in invading countries for their oil, we'd conquer Canada). Europe, however, is almost entirely beholden to them.

Oil fuels everything. It puts food in the supermarkets, powers the factories, generates electricity. You've suffered from a power outage before, haven't you? Remember how you couldn't do anything?

If oil goes away or if its price skyrockets, the price of everything else goes up, too. Guess who that hurts first? The poor. Suddenly, they can't heat their homes or afford the bus to work or put food on the table. If the price of energy stays prohibitively high, businesses can't afford the utilities or their inventory and people are thrown out of work.

If it happens in one country or locale, such as the EU, it sends ripples all across the world. And petroleum, being a fungible commodity, gets expensive for everyone when there's a shortage in one place.

The problem of energy sources is rooted in both economics and physics: alternate energy sources are currently very expensive, and it costs money to convert to other sources. Hydrogen fuel cells, for example, require energy to create (you've just shifted the point of combustion from the auto engine to the hyrdogen-extraction plant).

Thermodynamics also poses limitations: we can't derive energy from any old thing, and energy does dissipiate (hello 2nd law).

It's highly unfortunate that the crazies live on top of so much oil, but there's no quick solution to it.

Or are you implying that Big Oil is keeping us in this so that they can line their already bulging pockets? Yes, that's it. There's an easy solution in some guy's garage, but Big Oil sends in the black helicopters to suppress it.

What keeps us sucking up the crude? The fact that we don't have an economically or physically viable alternative yet. It's called reality. I suggest you factor it in sometime.

12/21/2006 11:52:00 AM  
Anonymous Le Froteur said...

I seem to hear a lot of debate about the relative merits of left vs right on this post, and I'm wondering if that is the best use of our time.

Can't we just assume that the left is bad, and move on to discussion of how to destroy it effectively?

Who's with me on this one?

12/21/2006 11:56:00 AM  
Anonymous dilys said...

OK, three strikes and I'm outta here...

The First Step, regarding "powerless over the intoxicating dreams of socialism," is a truly tragic issue. Dreams, conscious and unconscious, are lodged here, and foundational identity issues. Part of how socialism has been sold -- the dream of a kindly and undangerous existence; and a categorical reparative in which followers can be certified as "good" [and recently "interesting"] people. Both reflect a deeply religious drive, and have been served up to the Anxious Many at key imprintable stages.

At least as deep as addiction, because "I am a drunk" or "I am a druggie" is usually a pathos-filled excuse, not a pretext for the endorphin surge of self-righteousness.

All of us on a path to accepting Reality have to struggle with these things, giving up easy and narcissistic dreams, and renouncing using our allegiances as a means to make claims [most of all to ourselves] as superior. The problem for the left is, give up the illusions and nothing remains.

There is a way which leads to life. For those who find it, the point is not superiority, the point is life. And as I map Bob's world, all are invited. Not necessarily to argue, but to consider the cartography, and attentively compare their own maps to the terrain.

12/21/2006 11:57:00 AM  
Anonymous Joseph said...

To tag on to Dicentra, it is also curious to note that known reserves of oil continue to rise throughout the world, as our ability to discover it increases. The more we think we are running out, the more we seem to find. The problem is not so much our dependence on foreign oil (as Dicentra notes, noone complains about buying Canadian oil), but the fact that the Arab world is peopled by a very strong faction of lunatics. Saudi Arabia, for example, is a terrorist state, with a terrorist state religion, and, after London, the biggest supporter in money and training of terrorism in the world.

12/21/2006 11:59:00 AM  
Blogger dicentra63 said...

With all due respect, please spare us the Book of Mormon quotes, or I will tear that building down, figuratively, that is.

Do you object to the source or to the substance?

Because if it's the former, it doesn't sound like due respect to me.

12/21/2006 12:00:00 PM  
Anonymous joseph said...

I mean with all due respect to you, not the Book of Mormon.

12/21/2006 12:04:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

pls explain how Sweeden, Finland and Norway managed to have:

high rates of taxation
high levels of economic growth
low income inequalty (lower than ourts)
higher literacy rates than our own
lower infant mortality than our own
higher availability of child care
universal access to health care

just wondering. Could it be that some different approaches than your own might generate results that a population sees as preferable than those you apparently hold in such high regard.

btw track down Milton Friedman's views on integration by law of public accomodations

ponder what your beautiful SoCal environs would look like under a Friedmanite system: no limits to growth, no environmental regs and no public beaches or parks. Track down his writings on all of the above.

Also how he felt about consumer protection laws, car safety standards, worker safety regs, licensing of medical personnel...I'll stop there.

I'm not sure you would want to live in that world.

Learn a little economics, read about the economic concepts of externalities and market failure.

btw which liberal politicians that hold state of federal office would you describe as socialists ? Name specific names please. McCarthyism went out of fashion long ago.









learn some economics and read about the concept of externalitis

You won't find that from Hannity or Oreilly or Little Green Footballs.

12/21/2006 12:06:00 PM  
Anonymous Uncle Crayfish said...

Dicentra wrote, in response to my question about America's oil dependency

"What keeps us sucking up the crude? The fact that we don't have an economically or physically viable alternative yet. It's called reality. I suggest you factor it in sometime."

What Uncle Crayfish is suggesting is an alternate reality: that each American shoulder the tremendous burden and suffering of getting off the oil, one day at a time.

If you've been on heroin, you've got to detox, and it aint pretty. If you've been on oil, the detox can be even rougher. Some of us are going to freeze or starve. Our collective standard of living will plunge until alternate technologies come on line.

Americans are not pussies. We can do this. And where we go, everyone follows.

Imagine a world where Islam makes no money on oil. Yeah, sweeeet. That oughta shut them up.

12/21/2006 12:06:00 PM  
Blogger River Cocytus said...

Republican != Conservative
Conservative != Classical Liberal
and furthermore
Conservative != American Conservative

The terms are so mixed up it is sad. The Republicans and the Democrats represent more or less the 'right' and 'left' of the USA. But not all Republicans are conservatives, by which I mean American Conservatives. And American Conservatives are not necessarily very Conservative in the whole of their thought. We try to Conserve Classical Liberalism, which in a sense makes us both liberal (desiring liberty) and conservative (conserving the founding tenants).

This dichotomy of 'neo conservatives' or whatever else you want to call them makes it hard to put a finger on what they are. Mainly because America is not a society, in general, of public neurosis and thought-patterning, but especially among conservatives there is a wide range of opinion on fundamental things, except that the ideas of the Classical/Skeptical Enlightenment are foundational and important.

Not all are Christians (nor are all Christians thus) but we use the motto: "On the Solid Rock I stand, all other ground is sinking sand."

Understanding the strength of certain principles -- and finding that strength to be true -- frees one. The Christian idea simply is, in standing on Christ (if we should really do so) we are free to think as we will, for we will be able to avoid the traps of deceiving and sophistic thought.

This being said, there are many among the 'right' -- which is roughly the Republican party, but also everyone self-assigned to the 'right' of them, that are not Classical Liberals but represent if you will various 'old guards' of what is oft called paleo-conservatism. Another vague term, of course.

Many of these may in fact display fascistic tendencies, such as wanting to institute religious ideas, force corporate welfare, etc. They want to use government to enforce tradition, while the 'progressives' or 'leftists' tend to want to use government to enforce progress (whatever definition they come up with on whichever year.)

If you will pardon me, registered Libertarians are just people who haven't embraced the bicameral system yet.

To respond fully, I would say that what we think of in American Conservatism, Modern Conservatism, Neo-Conservatism, etc, is Classical Liberalism. Only because of the Tradition of America is this possible. America in this sense truly is different than other places.

Crayfish: We DO shoot ourselves in the feet. Its part of the system. Because of the democratic nature of it, we can't just autocratically say 'Well, this thought system is erroneous, so we're going to make sure these people suffer until they give it up.'

As for the Islamists, we will slowly but surely (with our system few things happen quickly that are good) remove our money from the Islamists. We can't just autocratically do it-- it simply does not work that way no matter how much we want it to.

To assume that we can is to misunderstand the principles of America. However to demand that we do not out of fairness makes our Constitution somewhat of a suicide pact, which it is not.

12/21/2006 12:07:00 PM  
Blogger River Cocytus said...

Also note that even if WE remove our money from the Arab oil, it will be replaced with money from other nations.

So its not an all-out solution at all.

12/21/2006 12:16:00 PM  
Blogger Van said...

dilys said...
...the assumption in "polarization and demonization leaves you a bit unbalanced" is that the preferable position is always somewhere in between poles... It is a useful way to train children, who have neither the thinking capacity nor experience to make up their minds accurately. But at some point the adult must say, "Here I stand. I can do no other.""


Nothing to add to that, you got it.

12/21/2006 12:20:00 PM  
Anonymous dilys said...

Ah, cell phones, affordable housing and IKEA, the glories of Finland!

No accounting of the consequences of every failed liberal program, and lecturing Bob on externalities! Really...!

12/21/2006 12:26:00 PM  
Blogger River Cocytus said...

It's a perversion of the idea of virtue being the mean between two extremes. The problem that Aristotle does not address is How you define the Extremes.

The world foolishly does the following: 'Well, evil and good are extremes, so the virtue must be to incorporate both of them...'

Nevermind that GOOD itself is a virtue and thus a balance of extremes.

The one represents the mean as a whole concept.

The two represents the virtue as its constituent parts.

The many represents the ways in which that virtue may vary -- ways which do not destroy its nature or essence.

As for 'left' vs 'right' it is a subjective definition. It is a false dichotomy, because partly what it represents is far, far too many ideas and positions to ever say 'this is the mean' or 'this is an extreme' based merely on how 'left' or 'right' someone is.

I'll put it to you this way. It is more like, the 'right' contains the mean, and also one of the extremes, whereas the left contains the other extreme. The 'containment' is vague and incomplete at best, mostly because 'left' and 'right' are self-identified instead of determined by definition, empirical truth, or essence.

The 'two' of Good and Evil is really 'three' -- if you want to look in terms of 'balance'. The extremes that need to be balanced are defined by Aristotle as 'excess' and 'lack'. Those are it! Whatever you're balancing must have those characteristics. Note that only through finagling and odd logic can you make the left and right look like 'excess' and 'lack'. For instance, the left is characterized as having an 'excess' of caring, whereas the right is characterized as having a 'lack' of caring.

Untrue to the application of fact.

Good and Evil is a different kind of pairing, a vertical pairing, so if you looked at a bell curve you would see the 'vertical' having two components, more or less, the 'upper' and the 'lower'. Horizontally there are three areas-- the left, middle and right.

If you cannot integrate both and create the whole chart you'll be lost.

To wit:

The evil of lack -> the good of Balance <- The evil of excess

This is what Aristotle is talking about. Whether or not it is, in all cases true, is something else to argue. But this is what you are misapplying, Integralist. It is in fact the misidentifying of the 'extremes' I think that creates these bad 'integrations' that do not make any sense.

Ya dig?

12/21/2006 12:31:00 PM  
Anonymous will said...

>> a black mirror of the Alchemical Marriage misapplied<< - Dilys

That's good.

Anybody remember what Jesse Jackson wrought in Sierra Leone when he, blindly (and no doubt, egotistically)intent on creating a "peace", insisted on the even-handed inclusion of fanatical, murderous rebels in the national gov't? A fearful slaughter committed by the rebels, that's what.

Which is what you get when you misapply the Alchemical Marriage and refuse to name evil for what it is.

12/21/2006 12:56:00 PM  
Blogger ximeze said...

Le Froteur said...
"Can't we just assume that the left is bad, and move on to discussion of how to destroy it effectively?
Who's with me on this one?"


ME ME ME
Drop the Big One Now!
Hail Yottle!!!!
©

12/21/2006 01:00:00 PM  
Blogger dicentra63 said...

• high rates of taxation
• high levels of economic growth
• low income inequalty (lower than ours)
• higher literacy rates than our own
• lower infant mortality than our own
• higher availability of child care
• universal access to health care


And a higher suicide rate!

Yes, you're right, the Europeans value different things than we do, but that doesn't mean that they're going to build a viable society with those values.

High income inequality isn't a problem if the poor are still doing pretty well. Only a leftist thinks that income equality is a virtue in itself, as if everyone being equally poor is better than most people being rich and some poor.

Literacy and infant mortality rates? Good for them.

As for availability of child care, you could argue that when one person can support a whole family, you don't need external child care. Parents do a better job of raising their kids than strangers or the government.

Universal access to health care! Yes! They can all go into a clinic and wait for 6 hours before being seen! They can wait 6 months for kidney-stone surgery!

Their health care might be universally accessible, but it's also universally mediocre. All the innovation and research and new pharmaceuticals are happening over here, in the US, where investing the time and trouble to create new medical stuff is amply rewarded.

12/21/2006 01:11:00 PM  
Anonymous integralist said...

psychoprincess said: We know Absolute Truth is a given, and given that FACT, upon which we stand, we then proceed with our viewpoints and structures.

That is fundamentalism and relates to what I see as perhaps the biggest problem here: anyone who disagrees with what seems to be a rather cultish mentality is automatically attacked and seen as a Leftist.

Isn't that a problem? How many diverse views are here? There is your supposedly Absolute Truth and everything else.

As Owen Barfield said, "opposition is friendship." Without it, we don't evolve.

Am I a leftist? Relative to virtually everyone here, sure. But as my name implies, I am interested in as integral a view as possible (and there is no underlying motive to that, despite what someone here implied).

We could simplify things and say we have roughly half the country as "red" and the other half as "blue," and they continue to fight amongst themselves, claiming their view is right and the other wrong--even outright evil (as many seem to say here about the Left, perhaps not noticing the froth building at the corner of their mouths).

Yet there is a growing, if very very small, minority that is asking some simple questions: What if both sides have some truth? What if, as Ken Wilber says, "everyone is right?" To some extent, at least (although not necessarily "equally" right).

So the main problem I see here--and what keeps it from being an "integral salon," so to speak, is its unbalancedness, and what seems to be a greater interest in being right and having someone to fight against, than in actual truth. I mean, I agree with a lot of what is said here--and to a large degree more than with the more nihilistic leftists that destory any deeper meaning.

Perhaps the core of it is a misunderstanding of Absolute Truth. Some, perhaps most, here believe that it is something that can be mentally grasped, formulated, and codified into an ideology. That is enormously problematic, to say the least.

12/21/2006 01:24:00 PM  
Blogger NoMo said...

integralist -
"that would mean that Leftism was pure evil, was completely and utterly wrong." Leftism, yes. All Leftists, no. Don't beg for conversion -- its unbecoming. Just convert. Mindshift, then hit the gas. You're in for a sweet ride! Truth is within your grasp (something keeps bringing you back, no?).

12/21/2006 01:26:00 PM  
Blogger Van said...

annonymous..."btw which liberal politicians that hold state of federal office would you describe as socialists ? Name specific names please."

Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) official party affiliation is Independent, but identifies himself as a Socialist.

Off the top of my head I'd say a good chunk of the Dem's, by their legislative records and campaigning are, at least in spirit, socialistic (Pelosi, Waters, Feingold, Kennedy...). Sadly, there are a number of Republicans who fit the bill as well - the bill being defined as support for public healthcare and other subsidies on the part of gov.

"McCarthyism went out of fashion long ago."
Missed the PC Scene, eh?

How do I explain your 'facts'?

Here's one way:
"The number of rape charges per capita in Malmö is 5 – 6 times that of Copenhagen, Denmark. Copenhagen is a larger city, but the percentage of immigrants is much lower. And it’s not just the rape statistics that reveal a scary increase in Malmö or Sweden. Virtually every kind of violent crime is on the rise. Robberies have increased with 50 % in Malmö only during the fall of 2004. Threats against witnesses in Swedish court cases have quadrupled between 2000 and 2003. During the past few decades, massive immigration has changed the face of Sweden’s major cities, as well as challenged the viability of the welfare state."

You can get some 'benefits' at the cost of freedom, but they are small, continually shrinking, and crippling to the soul.

"learn some economics and read ..." Frederich Bastiat preceded Milton Freidman by 100 years, and in some case said it better.


Bastiat, Socialism and the Blank Slate (a site with links to much of interest)

"It is evident," the French economist and parliamentarian Frédéric Bastiat wrote a century and a half ago, "that the socialists set out in quest of an artificial social order only because they deemed the natural order to be either bad or inadequate; and they deemed it bad or inadequate only because they felt that men's interests are fundamentally antagonistic, for otherwise they would not have recourse to coercion. It is not necessary to force into harmony things that are inherently harmonious."1

I would eagerly take choose a law of the land based on Freidman or Bastiat, not in spite of what you cite, but because of what you cite!

12/21/2006 01:26:00 PM  
Blogger LukeBlogWalker said...

Anonymous said...

"pls explain how Sweeden, Finland and Norway managed to have:"

"high rates of taxation"

Socialism

"high levels of economic growth"

Depends on how you look at it.

"low income inequalty (lower than ourts)"

Socialism -giving equivalent misery to all. How many Gates, Morgan, Rockefellers do they have?

"higher literacy rates than our own"

Thats not hard to do, tell it to the NEA and the other Socialists who think putting condoms on a bananna is good instruction.

"lower infant mortality than our own"

Are you counting abortion rates too?

"higher availability of child care"

Socialism

"universal access to health care"

Socialism

We have universal access here in the USA -its just that the rest of us pay for it in rates instead of taxes.

In California, illegals who get arrested and tossed into the slam, can get a free college education while incarcerated. Go figure.

-Luke

PS - I agree, Drop the Big on now.

(Pulls out his copy of Dr. Strangelove, and Randy Newman)

12/21/2006 01:35:00 PM  
Blogger ximeze said...

"and what keeps it from being an "integral salon"...

Why on earth & in the heavens would we want THAT?

You're the one peddling that stuff. Seems most of us think it unevolved & BS.

Sorry that you're dissppointed we can't meet your expectations, that we're not "open minded" enough to buy what you're peddling.

Been there, done that, saw where it led. Got a clue & got happy & grateful.

12/21/2006 01:49:00 PM  
Blogger River Cocytus said...

Integralist, there are things which are True and those which are False. Am I not correct?

PyschoPrincess is not a fundamentalist, (or not as you would define one) but is a person making a truth claim. Either you AGREE with her, or DISAGREE with her in part or in whole. To that view, denying that this truth exists is just silly. Her statement however, that she knows the Truth and bases her ideas on it, is what all should be doing. If we disagree, then it is not that the Truth is wrong or does not exist or includes fallacy but that we in our imperfection do not see it.

And because we disagree does not mean that we are equally wrong either-- I might be totally wrong and she correct (even if we do not realize it-- and hopefully we do, because to be right and not recognize it can mean you lose your correctness quite quickly!)

You are arguing that this is a bad intellectual salon because some viewpoints are not tolerated-- but what are you modeling your 'salon' on? If not on a real, existing salon, then what proof have you that it even can exist? Bob is approaching truth from where it resides (or doing his best to do so) and is pointing out that a lot of what you are espousing is false, or perhaps not false so much as flat.

Granted from your perspective (like Aristotle) the Sun does appear to go around the Earth. But Bob is saying, no, from here I can tell you the Sun is the center on which the Earth rotates, and furthermore, it is due to gravity, and furthermore the sun itself goes around a larger structure... etc. Be like the theoretical Aristotle mentioned earlier and say simply, "Oh. I see what you mean. So how do you think all of it works?"

Some will come in and declare, in effect, that we are idiots, and that the Sun is clearly the center of the universe, and we will say "You are wrong!" and they will respond as: "Oh, so you guys say the Sun goes around the Earth! Such ignorance!" As if those were the only two views!

And then you came in and in effect said, "The Earth must go around the Sun AND the Sun around the Earth! There must be truth to both positions!" There IS-- of course, in that is that the Earth goes around the sun while APPEARING that the sun goes around the Earth. Not that they both are literally true.

Does that hold any water for ya?

12/21/2006 01:51:00 PM  
Blogger LukeBlogWalker said...

River,

Having just coded up an information website for a huge company, I was amused at your pseudo code.

heh heh

-Luke

12/21/2006 01:56:00 PM  
Blogger MikeZ said...

I think I see the conflict between Dr Bob and integralist. Bob sees what the followers of people like Marx and Gramsci have wrought, and that today's left are the philosophical descendants of those failed systems, and so naturally, is on guard against whatever pops up (an analogy with Whack-a-Mole is not inappropriate).

David Horowitz is pretty much in the same boat - and he started out in the Left.

The problem seems to be that there are still people, like integralist, who might not see that second connection. All we have to do is show it.

integralist: "However, that would mean that Leftism was pure evil, was completely and utterly wrong. And I just don't see that."

I have to side with Bob on this - it is completely and utterly wrong (maybe even, to quote Pauli again, "It's not even wrong!"). Whether that makes it "pure evil" is another matter. Just sitting there being wrong doesn't make something evil, but when it goes around trying to confuse people into thinking that it's not wrong at all - maybe that's enough to qualify as evil.

We could start a list: bring up the things you believe are good, on the left.

Before I leave for Christmas, I'd like to encourage PsychoPrincess to start your own blog. You write with passion (something not often seen in blogland), perhaps too much to be contained in the narrow confines of a comment box. As the old saying goes, "write on!".

Lastly, about that Kennedy speech - well now, what did you expect, voting in a Catholic!

Speaking of other virulent theocrats, look through the speeches of the early Presidents (looks like PsychoPrincess is already there). By "early", I mean, up through Lincoln and many thereafter.

Almost without exception, in their inaugurals and farewells, they invoked the blessings of God, and thanked Him for his bounty upon the country.

One of the more telling is Washington's Thanksgiving Proclamation (1789, but lost in the archives until the 1920s):

"Whereas it is the duty of all nations to acknowledge the providence of Almighty God, to obey His will, to be grateful for His benefits, and humbly to implore His protection and favor; and Whereas both Houses of Congress have, by their joint committee, requested me to "recommend to the people of the United States a day of public thanksgiving and prayer, to be observed by acknowledging with grateful hearts the many and signal favors of Almighty God, especially by affording them an opportunity peaceably to establish a form of government for their safety and happiness:..."

Where was the ACLU when we needed them?

12/21/2006 02:33:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Van:

Some other prominent advocates of psuedo socialist policies:

George W Tom DeLay and countless others who fight for economic incentives for the energy industry

George W and the others who proposed the medicaid drug benefit (socialist) and included in it a restriction against competitive bidding by drug companies to supply the plan

Ted Stevens who advocates major public works projects

Those that accepted no bid contracts for Iraq and Katrina belief

Come to think of it, any public relief for katrina victims and reconstruction

Any politician who votes for money for national parks (i believe a new one was set up in Hawaii under the Bush administration)

Ah yes bring me that Bastiat/Friedman society with no sidewalks or sewers (except the ones the wealthy build in their neighborhoods), no restrictions on child labor, no safety regs for any consumer product or industrial activity, no food inspections. Parks and beaches owned only by private entrepeneurs who restrict the entry to those homeowners who bought homes on the property etc etc etc

Damn those socialists they have ruined our society.

If you paused to learn how societies work and read some books on politics,economics and history work you wouldn't feel obligated to brand everyone to the left of you a socialist. Do you even know what the term means ?

When has Bernie Sanders,an Independent and clearly the most left politician in Congress, ever advocated policies that would meet this definition:
"state or worker control of the means of production" the most commonly used definition of socialism. ?

But of course using precision in language would entail rational thought based on something other than blogs or talk radio. Which of course would mean reading a whole book. Which of course....

12/21/2006 02:57:00 PM  
Blogger NoMo said...

mikez said..."I'd like to encourage PsychoPrincess to start your own blog". I know my vote doesn't count for much here, but P2, please don't go! Passion is passion.

Besides, to paraphrase W.C. Douglass of the Daily Dose --"According to a new book titled The Female Mind — written by a UC affiliated, self-labeled feminist named Dr. Luan Brizendine — the average woman gives voice to around 20,000 words per day, compared to just 7,000 or so from the typical man. Apparently, this disparity in expressiveness is the result of actual physiological and hormonal differences in the way men’s and women’s brains develop — not from man-centric societal influences (as most revisionist PC types would maintain)".

'Nuff said?

12/21/2006 03:20:00 PM  
Anonymous will said...

Ximeze -

Actually, it eventually may become a two-men-enter-one-man-leave equation before too long, on its own accord.

Yottle, in his wrinkled wisdom, defines peace as "taking time to reload."

Yottle charges you a buck fiddy for publically using his name.

12/21/2006 03:36:00 PM  
Blogger LukeBlogWalker said...

Oh History is just SO much fun!

Some of the Commie Politicians of note..

Ron "The Red" Dellums D California
Known for giving classified material to Ortega's Army.

Maxine Waters D California and others who appeared as members of the CPUSA in a previous election cycle. Marvelous.

The Kremlin's Useful Idiots..
(Treasonous bastards)

http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=26004

Oh, and how about the Clintons? Letting China and North Korea have intelligence and technology they were not supposed to have?

I really -love- that DPRK has rocket staging technology now and can hit the West Coast with nukes. Thats just peachy.

I guess this comes from some warped idea of equality of weapons equals greater peace. Of course, intent to use them is not in their playbook.

Anything worth shooting, is worth shooting twice!

Or, am I being a bit too tough on the Left again?

-Luke

12/21/2006 03:37:00 PM  
Anonymous dilys said...

some days I can't stay away...>~(:-0)

First, something does not have to be "pure evil" to be a decidedly impractical and dysproductive idea in application. Overstating the choice as "pure evil" or OK is another false dilemma. That maneuver, plus assigning it parity with the good, then tends toward definable moral and intellectual evil.

There is a Kabbalistic principle that can be confused with "the mean," and that is based in this: in the universe the expansive "light" aspect and the constrained "dark" side / yang&yin both have a right to exist as essential expressions of the divine, and evil consists of either pole declaring only it is worthy of existence. Generally the "progressive" moan in these OC circumstances is "you're being narrow because you're one pole and we're another and you say we are bad and you're good."

Not so. I believe the actual situation is that the Vertical perspective (which Bob seeks to express) alone incorporates a vision of both poles and does indeed accomodate them, comedy&tragedy, life&death, human nobility&human brokenness. On the other hand, the utopian goals&strategies of the Left seek to wipe out all that is not in harmony with their view, to "immanentize the Eschaton," or, in Biblical terms, pull up all the weeds and have a centrally planned garden. It never works. Unintended consequences and unforeseen opposition have consequences which are irreversible in the realm of time.

Once again, it's a matter of talking on two levels. Rhetorically elusive to describe, but an unmistakable phenomenon. For a Graphics Geek effort at explanation, see here.

Not understanding code, real or pseudo, River&Luke, let me say that the discussion of the mean and the agency of defining the extremes or tails is beautifully explained, worthy of expansion, and would benefit from further graphics geekdom in my opinion. If I can help, let me know.

And yes, Psychoprincess, take the BlogPlunge. It's an altogether enriching experience. You probably already know it's easy/easy/easy. The worst that can happen is you acquire more pyjamas. Another benefit is that your thoughts will be collected in one place for your own and others' benefit.

12/21/2006 03:44:00 PM  
Anonymous petey said...

Dupree asked an interesting question the other day, although he might have stolen it from Scalia:

"What is the compromise position between what the Constitution actually says and what Leftists would like for it to say?"

I think that pretty much sums it up. One might just as well ask, "what is the compromise postion between how economics works and how leftists wish economics worked?"

12/21/2006 03:51:00 PM  
Anonymous will said...

>>the average woman gives voice to around 20,000 words per day, compared to just 7,000 or so from the typical man<<

ONLY 20,000? I woulda thought . .

Ever notice that men are often confounded when talking about a problem with women? - even when the men have "solved" the prob in succinct, straightforward terms, women want to keep talking about it, around it, over it, under it, etc.

Why? WHY? Well, because women find that talking itself is a healing factor, a balm. You might say this is a non-linear, trans-logical method of solving problems. Sisters, I'm not knocking it, just pointing it out.

And of course, I am speaking in general terms, not always applicable to the individual.

12/21/2006 03:53:00 PM  
Anonymous dilys said...

Yeah, right, we linguistically clumsy imprecise unread doofi who brand the building of city-wide sewers by properly-elected city governments "socialism".

I think that was you, the one without a name...

12/21/2006 03:55:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I AM so glad that we now have an admin standing up to the North Koreans unlike those socialist clintons and all those big biz capitalists are fighting against technology transfers to China

it helps me sleep so much better at night

remove the blinders folks and let in the light

12/21/2006 04:00:00 PM  
Anonymous Joan of Argghh! said...

Why do so many polite dissenters think that this blog endorses any political candidate in particular? Do you just hear Left and Right and immediately think it's about politics in all its mundane and predictable permutations?

It's not about touting or extolling the virtues of any political system or person per se, but about the discernment of Truth. That the majority of one political party holds fairly faithfully to something entirely at odds with Absolute Truth is not to say that all do, and vice versa.

This is such a simple "given" that anyone who comes in here talking very politely and saying, "oh yeah? Well what about ____? Huh?" as if to have finally! uncovered hypocrisy in someone other than themselves is the troll's "tell".

It tells us everything we need to know. We jab at such with hatpins and howitzers because we enjoy stimulating conversation even if it is at the expense of one who promised so much and delivered so little.

Sigh.

***

Will said, "Leftism is essentially Botox for the mind - and it freezes the mind into the same grotesque, unyielding mask that Botoxed faces often bear. "

Brrr! You win the prize for chilling images of the Botox zombies. Burt-Reynolds-as-Freddie-Kruger comes to mind. I'm not sure he'll let us use his image as a place-holder for Leftism, however.

***

Ximeze,

I see that you now are sucking up to Yottle. Is there no limit to your ambition? I can admire such designs on power. However, Yottle is a capricious and bragadocious counterfeit of Petey, so do be careful!

The Cosmic Raccoons are a friendly bunch, but allegiance to the Yottle may be looked upon as less than "k"osher.

Just lookin' out for you, X. Even the "rat" reference was not enough to put me out of humor or wish you ill. Your unabashed passion for place and significance is kinda refreshing in someone your age.

;)

***

Yottle, a check for $4.50 is in the mail.

12/21/2006 04:03:00 PM  
Anonymous Jimmy J. said...

Anonymous asked,
"pls explain how Sweeden, Finland and Norway managed to have:

high rates of taxation
high levels of economic growth
low income inequalty (lower than ourts)
higher literacy rates than our own
lower infant mortality than our own
higher availability of child care
universal access to health care

just wondering. Could it be that some different approaches than your own might generate results that a population sees as preferable than those you apparently hold in such high regard."

So glad you asked. I was in Scandinavia this year. They are looking for well educated professional people who want to move there, learn the language and enjoy all the benefits that you pointed out. Are you going to immigrate? Do you know anyone who wants to? Would you encourage anyone living in the U.S. to go Scandinavian?

Now, as to the way they structure their economies with the state managing, through taxation and central planninmg, the rate of accumulation of wealth. Yes, they have democratically voted to go that route. However, let me point out that they are still racially homogenous, with few non- Scandinavian voters actually in the countries. Additionally, they are up to 96% Lutheran, and, though not especially religious, the old Lutheran ethics (hard work, honesty, charity) pervade their cultures. That kind of ethics would help any country economically.

Their problem is twofold: 1. They are not reproducing fast enough to replace their populations, so they must accept immigrants or decline. So far the main group that has immigrated has been people from Islamic countries who tend to settle in ghettos because they don't want to integrate into the culture. Thus far that has suited the Scandinavians because they really don't want these people to integrate. Sweden has the biggest problem in that regard and it is one reason for the increasing crime rates there.

The other problem these countries have is that their socialism has tended to exacerbate price increases. Prices and the cost of living are not low, especially in Norway. High prices for their goods and services make them less competitive in world markets. You may believe that they are booming economically, but the truth is they are stagnant compared to the U.S. or even the UK.

Norway also has a problem because of their oil wealth. When that runs out, all that money, presently shared with the people, won't be available. Everyone's income will decline and their standards of living with it. (Ah, but the misery will be equally shared - a very desirable outcome. at least in your opinion?)

The Swedes are starting to get the message. They just elected their first conservative parliament in many, many years. However, things are starting out rather rocky as the conservative MPs have been attacked on ethics questions. (Not paying taxes on nanny services etc.)

I accept that the above will not deter you from your belief that all is hunky dory in Norway, Sweden, Finland, and Denmark, but I just had to take shot at it.

12/21/2006 04:09:00 PM  
Anonymous cousin dupree said...

If anyone has any economic illusions, just go to TCS Daily (in the blogroll) and search "Sweden."

12/21/2006 04:22:00 PM  
Blogger Van said...

Annonymous said..."If you paused to learn how societies work and read some books on politics,economics and history work you wouldn't feel obligated to brand everyone to the left of you a socialist."

Dear mister strident, I'm sorry to ruffle your feathers by identifying Bernie Sanders as a SOcialist, perhaps you'd like to take it up with Him? He identifies himself as an independent socialist. Much info is available, but you can start with his official website

"*More information about Congressman Sanders can be obtained from his political autobiography, Outsider in the House by Bernie Sanders and Huck Gutman, Verso Press, 1997. Other books that describe his political career as Mayor of Burlington, Vermont and candidate for Congress are: People's Republic: Vermont and the Sanders Revolution by Greg Guma, 1989; Challenging the Boundaries of Reform: Socialism in Burlington by W.J. Conroy, 1990; Socialist Mayor: Bernard Sanders in Burlington, Vermont by Steven Soifer, 1991; Making History in Vermont: The Election of a Socialist to Congress by Steven Rosenfeld, 1992."


"...Do you even know what the term means?"

Yep. Been studying it for a couple decades now. Using real tree cutting owl displacing pulverized tree paper products. Unlike yourself who lurks annonymously, you can follow my profile back to my site and see if there's anything there relating to what you want to assume about me, before making a further sphincter of yourself. As to the rest of your rant - see previous sentence.

12/21/2006 04:22:00 PM  
Blogger Van said...

Annonymous, by the way do you read, or just skim for something that hits your nerve? The very next sentence from what set you off was

"Sadly, there are a number of Republicans who fit the bill as well - the bill being defined as support for public healthcare and other subsidies on the part of gov."

Many of whom you mentioned. Relax get a grip, take a breath and try thinking before freaking.

12/21/2006 04:26:00 PM  
Anonymous cosanostradamus said...

So it's 1 to 1 in the vote for PsychoPrincess to 1)start her own blog or to 2)stay. In the interest of fairness and compromise, which obviously everyone here cares about more than anything else in the whole world, I vote for both! Finally, an integral solution that works. Or does that merely cancel my own vote? Darn these touchscreen voting machines, I think they're rigged.

NoMo, make sure you take note of what's spinning on Dupree's turntable today... :-)

12/21/2006 04:29:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I am SO over trying to milk the bulls.

I just want to hang out with Petey.

12/21/2006 04:43:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

And P.S., Integralist

Bob is about is about as "integral" as one can get.

Even if you're too myopic to see it.

12/21/2006 04:46:00 PM  
Blogger LukeBlogWalker said...

Anonymous said...

"I AM so glad that we now have an admin standing up to the North Koreans unlike those socialist clintons and all those big biz capitalists are fighting against technology transfers to China

it helps me sleep so much better at night

remove the blinders folks and let in the light"

Hmm, I didn't see anything about adoring the current crop of part timers in Washington.

It is a known and verifiable fact that many MANY democrats are members of CPUSA or other similar groups, and also that they have conducted themselves in a treasonous manner.

Next time, try not to assume a non existent polar opposite and beat on that straw man!

Was that milk the bull, or shovel it?

-Luke

12/21/2006 04:50:00 PM  
Anonymous Connecticut Yankee said...

"...the average woman gives voice to around 20,000 words per day, compared to just 7,000 or so from the typical man." Just as we thought/feared: male politicians are atypical men.

Apropos of the difficulty of changing minds: ShrinkWrapped has a thoughtful post today on why this is so: http://shrinkwrapped.blogs.com/blog/2006/12/changing_a_mind.html

One small editorial note for Bob-- the bug that is making your little boy so sick is called a rotavirus (with an "a," not a second "o")-- they are nasty critters indeed. There is an oral vaccine against rotavirus that was just approved this year, FWIW. Anyway, I hope the little one will be feeling better soon.

12/21/2006 05:08:00 PM  
Blogger NoMo said...

Cos - thanks, now I know what to get me for Christmas!

12/21/2006 05:14:00 PM  
Anonymous The Count said...

I'm interested in Bob's audience demographics. Any brown or black people reading? Can I have a show of hands?

12/21/2006 05:43:00 PM  
Anonymous Garden Gnome said...

Who exactly and specifically are these mysterious leftists, the millions of them scattered over the planet?

Do they really have some monolithic attitude to all the perplexing questions and problems that all human beings have to deal with.

The same question could be asked of any grouping of people such as Buddhists or Christians. There are a billion Christians and several hundred million Buddhists each with a completely different set of subjective meanings and interpretaions of the teachings of Jesus and the Buddha. And in the case of Buddhist,the many other great realizers within that multi-faceted tradition.

By your definition the profoundly conservative Wendell Berry would be a raving loony lefty. Are you familiar with the 2 essays he wrote in response to Sept 11? Namely The Idea of A Local Economy and Thoughts In The Presence of Fear.
He was/is also associated with the campaign to stop the USA invasion of Iraq and the entire politics of fear associated with that invasion.
Berry has always been an advocate of the only truly conservative politics, summed up in the phrase Small Is Beautiful. He has consistently opposed the abuse of power by both big government and big business.

12/21/2006 05:51:00 PM  
Blogger geckofeeder said...

God works in mysterious ways - what better way to celebrate the gift of the Magi than a festive scroll of your excellent New 12 Step Program for the Left printed out and festively ribboned, that is only ,of course, with your kind permission.
Hoping that Gagboy is on the mend in time to hear the reindeer . . . back to wrapping- ho ho ho.

12/21/2006 05:52:00 PM  
Anonymous Joan of Argghh! said...

Dear NoCount:

You go first.

Me? I am Spartacus.

12/21/2006 05:53:00 PM  
Blogger River Cocytus said...

No... I am Spartacus. Imposter!

12/21/2006 06:21:00 PM  
Anonymous cousin dupree said...

Wendell Berry? Now there's an intellectual giant.

12/21/2006 06:27:00 PM  
Anonymous hoarhey said...

Anonymous said...
"pls explain how Sweeden, Finland and Norway managed to have:

high rates of taxation
high levels of economic growth
low income inequalty (lower than ourts)
higher literacy rates than our own
lower infant mortality than our own
higher availability of child care
universal access to health care"

It's called NORTH SEA OIL, tax the hell out of it and spread the wealth out to cripple your society into weakness, decadence and dependency. As mentioned before, God help them when the black crude runs out and they are left with a nation of dependent thumb-suckers. Same reason why those in power in the Mid East are so wealthy. OIL

Found that out on O'Reilly by the way BWAAAAAAHAHAHAhahahah!

You want Socialists?

Ever heard of the Progressive Congressional Caucus? There are currently 50+ card carrying Democrat members in Congress of this organization: http://www.dsausa.org/dsa.html which is affiliated with Socialist International.
And those are just the ones who actually joined, not just sympathizers. Sounds like a big conspiracy doesn't it? Guess what, wake up and smell the coffee.

Do your own homework.

12/21/2006 07:05:00 PM  
Blogger Van said...

Garden Gnome said...
Who exactly and specifically are these mysterious leftists, ...Do they really have some monolithic attitude to all the perplexing questions and problems that all human beings have to deal with The same question could be asked of any grouping of people such as Buddhists or Christians... "

Such a premis would have legs if you had posed it to "The Count" who for some reason is interested in (I would guess) meaningless demographics of the skin tone of Cosmonauts. Perhaps useful if discussing genetic ailments, but Ideas? Utterly worthless, at least as it relates to ideas.

But Leftists? Buddhists? Christians? There are certain general truths that can be applied and inferred from each, based on the essential definitions of each philosophy - and of course the further you drill down, the more specifics will separate them into different subsets. If you want to know how Gagdad (and most of us) define leftists, you'll have to read a sizable quantity of posts/comments, and then you'll be able to answer for yourself who these mysterious (not so much) leftists are.

12/21/2006 07:05:00 PM  
Blogger River Cocytus said...

I think I already tread that ground? 'Conservatives' are not the same thing entirely as 'American Conservatives' or 'Neo-Conservatives'. There are plenty of 'conservatives' who are not classical liberals.

For instance, a conservative from India-- probably not going to be a classical liberal.

End of story.

12/21/2006 07:07:00 PM  
Anonymous hoarhey said...

>>"Am I a leftist? Relative to virtually everyone here, sure. But as my name implies, I am interested in as integral a view as possible (and there is no underlying motive to that, despite what someone here implied)."<<


You can use my name just for clarity.
Until you can come out of your denial and answer the question of your true motivations, you'll never move off of square one, you'll always be "poleznye idioty".
The fact that you come here posturing yourself as the intellectual equal of Bob, not to mention many others here is laughable as well as a clue to your most insoluble mystery.

12/21/2006 07:16:00 PM  
Blogger NoMo said...

I am compelled to say nothing. Doh!

12/21/2006 07:24:00 PM  
Blogger ximeze said...

Beloved & Great Mysteress:

Thank you, once again, for Your Condescension & Worthy Advice to one so lowly such as me.

I did wonder if it was Permitted to Utter the Name of the Blessed Y.

Clearly, once again, I should have sought Your Counsel prior to showing my grovelling respect to other Exalted Ones. I meant no disrespect.

Besides, He just wants to get his hand in my pocket.

Hail Mysteress!
Hail Mysteress!

And now, this member of the BobHead must retire from Your Presence for a while.

I have a 12 Step meeting to go to!

12/21/2006 07:25:00 PM  
Blogger NoMo said...

Just doin' my part to get to the magic 100.

12/21/2006 07:25:00 PM  
Blogger NoMo said...

ximeze - There's a fine line between admiration and worship. Where it is, I have no idea.

Hail Mysteress! We long for a word, a glance, a nod, a...

12/21/2006 07:29:00 PM  
Anonymous will said...

Joan, just to be clear, Yottle, however capricious he may be, cannot be bragadocious because, to be honest, he's never uttered a word. I'm merely passing on what the little god would probably say whenever he gets around to saying something. Which I'm sure will be any day now.

His silence, to be sure, is perfect and serene.

12/21/2006 07:47:00 PM  
Blogger Van said...

I'm with Cosanostradamus on the Psquared blog or comment issue (actually I'd like to subdivide it one more by requesting her book) by being a first rate Integralist, supporting the idea of her rejecting some archaic conception of reality and time constraints in favor or her taking a more inclusive posture by doing each at the same time.

I also suggest that she color code each so that we might be better able to label what she meant to say but wasn't aware of meaning at the time(s).

12/21/2006 07:55:00 PM  
Blogger Van said...

NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!! IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII AM SPARTACUSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

12/21/2006 07:56:00 PM  
Blogger Van said...

I nodded off at the keyboard for a moment, and found myself dreaming.... Joan of Argghh!!! and Ximeze stepped out of my keys...

Delight of Delights!!!
Menage e Blog!

But then something happened with robes sticking and ages aging... then there was kung-fu & .38's flying through the air and suddenly I was disembodied and being sucked out into the blogosphere...

Pity.

12/21/2006 07:59:00 PM  
Blogger Van said...

100 !!!

12/21/2006 08:01:00 PM  
Blogger LukeBlogWalker said...

Well..

I for one, think the Princess should do both. Have her own Blog (try blogger.com) and post here. At least the quintessential Princess collection would be on her blog.

Now who was it that was asking about race here? LOL

Hey I like those big red shoes and that big red hair and big red nose you have there.. BOZO!

Let me guess, we're all a bunch of toothless rednecks with baseball bats in the gun racks of our peeekup trucks huh?

Hey Joan, is that the imprint of a can of Skoal on the back pocket of your jeans?

Nomo is them your two huntin' dawgs over there?

Hoarhey, have you seen my John Deere ballcap?

Man, I gotta go, almost late for my Klan meeting!

-Luke

PS -carm.org was cool, thanks.

12/21/2006 08:11:00 PM  
Blogger LukeBlogWalker said...

... oh man, left my lifetime NRA belt buckle on the coffee table in here, right next to my autographed photo of Adolf Hitler..

-sorry about that

;)

-Luke

12/21/2006 08:14:00 PM  
Anonymous will said...

>>in the universe the expansive "light" aspect and the constrained "dark" side / yang&yin both have a right to exist as essential expressions of the divine, and evil consists of either pole declaring only it is worthy of existence<< - Ms Dilys

Jacob Boehme's Kabbalistic-like riff on this - the dark side, which is actually a "dark fire", or the "wrath of God", is that which gives birth to the light. In the same sense, paganism provided the necessary energy/fire to spark the light of eventual Christian spiritual transcendence. Or in the case of the individual, the lower instinctual energies must first exist in order for them to rise in the body and assume a transcendent pitch. In other words, same energy, different frequencies that "know each other not".

To succumb to evil, one must reverse the upward flow and revert back to the primal dark fire, the un-transcendent wrath of God".

The reason I prefer Boehme's perspective is because it "humanizes" the cosmic struggle between good and evil, light and darkness - the daily effort to moderate our passions is no less than the desire to convert our primal energies into light, which is no less than the cosmic struggle itself.

12/21/2006 08:14:00 PM  
Blogger NoMo said...

luke - We're all bozos on this bus...

12/21/2006 08:16:00 PM  
Blogger LukeBlogWalker said...

Just poking around the net, so these are not "official" numbers.. but..

Mao 77 Million dead
Stalin 61 Million dead
Hitler -a paltry 6-7 million dead
Pol Pot about 2 million

Just thought I'd toss that into the blender.

Nomo -my mother was a Bozoette in College. ;)

-From the Spanish, "Bozotros"

I just got some new software from Wimpy's -have to try it. ;)

-Luke

12/21/2006 08:20:00 PM  
Anonymous The Count said...

Well, I didn't really get any response to my question about skin color among Bob's people, except someone who said that when it comes to ideas skin color doesn't matter.

That I'll agree to. However,when a phenomenon like this blog tends to centrifuge its audience into a certain narrow category, I find that interesting.

Is it really all white people here? Why would that be? What does that say about cyberspace? About online intellectual discussions in America today? About the basic constituency of neoconservation/American liberal politics?

It brings out the social scientist in me. Plus, I sense also that writers to this blog are by and large over the age of 25. Why would that be?

This is possibly an enclave of mature white thinkers, which represents a bona-fide cultural construct which is of great interest.

12/21/2006 08:49:00 PM  
Anonymous cousin dupree said...

Count--

Aren't I black enough for you?

Get a life.

12/21/2006 08:58:00 PM  
Anonymous Brown Lover said...

Dear Mr. Count:

I share your interest in skin color.

I'm represent the California "spin down to brown" (SDTB) movement. We advocate intentional race mixing to homogenize our nation's people into a standard light-brown color.

This will do a number of good things-- first, it will end affirmative action.
Second, it will end both overt and covert discrimination on the basis of skin color.
Third, it will lead to greater social stabiity and conhesion.
Fourth,a sense of national unity and pride will be easier to inculcate.
And lastly, it just plain looks good. Brown is beautiful.

If you're black, marry white.
If you're white, marry black.
If you're brown, marry anybody.

I'll soon have a blogsite up where anyone who's interested may visit and join our dialogue and support groups.

Yours truly,
Ms. Xaviera Barnes
Chairman, SDTB of CA

12/21/2006 08:59:00 PM  
Blogger Van said...

Dilys... A good take on Good and Evil.

I would casually put forth that the Good is typically visible in that which properly integrates Values (Values being true, non-contradictory 'expressions' of Reality which you act to seek or retain) and the Evil as that which mis- or dis-integrates Values; the degree of Evil involved being accentuated by whether or not the action is done purposefully.

Where there are opposing views on complex issues (assuming that the 'evil' is not knowingly chosen), but each seems to have value, investigation will probably find equivocations, faulty definitions and non-sequiters in one or both of the positions, resulting in mis-integrating contradictions into the central position.

We've been tossing Aristotle around a bit the last few days and I think he's starting to get a bit bruised. Regarding the famous Aristotelian Mean, its essential meaning is grasping a central Truth or truths which are properly integrated without contradicting reality; with polar mis-integrations at each of the opposite extremes. For instance:

The Aristotelian mean of Courage being the moral strength to act in a contextually appropriate manner in the defense of (your) worthy values.

Rashness would be taking inappropriate actions, actions which unnecessarily imperil your values or yourself or both, either due to a lack of judgment & self control, or as an attempt to appear to be courageous.

Cowardice is the refusal to take contextually appropriate action in defense of your values, probably due to a poorly integrated hierarchy of values, or due to holding contradictory 'values', which cause you to seek to preserve a lesser value (such as avoiding pain or continued breathing) over a higher value (your soul, lives of loved ones, defense of the nation that makes all other values possible).

In Aristotle’s view, Virtue was not a (mathematical) average or mean of good and bad actions, it was the well integrated expression of a Value or Values which themselves integrated spirit and action, towards successfully living and achieving Happiness. Central to all Three (Rashness, Courage, Cowardice) is a Value and an Action (in this case defensive or offensive action that could put your life in peril), unbalancing one side is putting too much emphasis on Action for actions sake whether or not it supports your actual Value, and the other is putting too much emphasis on a lack of, or avoidance of taking action - both of which actually imperil the central value that the true Virtue of Courage defends.

12/21/2006 09:12:00 PM  
Blogger Van said...

(with apologies to Ayn Rand, I think that values definition is a memory battered quote from her epistemolgy - been awhile)

12/21/2006 09:21:00 PM  
Blogger Van said...

Ms. Xaviera Barnes Chairman, SDTB of CA,

One benefit you missed was the eradication of unsightly blotching and alternating patches of bleached whale belly white next to bright red sunburns.

12/21/2006 09:25:00 PM  
Blogger Van said...

Pluhease

12/21/2006 09:25:00 PM  
Blogger Van said...

Joan of Argghh!!! said..."This is such a simple "given" that anyone who comes in here talking very politely and saying, "oh yeah? Well what about ____? Huh?" as if to have finally! uncovered hypocrisy in someone other than themselves is the troll's "tell".

It tells us everything we need to know. We jab at such with hatpins and howitzers because we enjoy stimulating conversation even if it is at the expense of one who promised so much and delivered so little."

I've nothing to add - just wanted to see it in 'print' again.

12/21/2006 09:30:00 PM  
Anonymous hoarhey said...

Count must be "black friend" of days gone by.
Just because you hear little or no ebonics doesn't mean there are no colorful people here.
Having no access to any photos besides Bob's, in addition to your other talents, you must also be psychic.
Also, I would think you more perceptive, being a social scientist and all, isn't it obvious, given the depth responses, that ALL of our trolls are under the age of 25? ;)

12/21/2006 09:36:00 PM  
Anonymous PsychoPrincess said...

MIKE Z: Excellent reference to Horowitz! Every Leftie should be reading and listening to him since he CAN and HAS come out from among them to our side!

RIVER-C: EXCELLENT use of the classic Heliocentric vs. Geocentric paradigms - one of the longest "fights" for Truth in history. Well spoken Brother! The concept of ENMESHMENT of the two paradigms at once shows WHY it isnt RIGHT to seek to ENMESH, but to start at a beginning of Truth and go from there.

Lefties are able to see and do see that Absolute Truth is foundational = but becuz they are "threatened" by its being once again, they play mental dodge-ball and their games begin.

What is it, Integalist, that offends you so about Absolute Truth?

And in the name of knowing Truth, for the record I'm NOT a Fundamentalist. You cant really seem to understand that we DO achieve a balance that is different from your own, so you compulsively seek again and again to enmesh that which does not in Sanitys sake go together.

If you as a mad-scientist try to Frankenfashion male and females together you get a dissolution of both - a shemale, being one nor the other. Surely THIS cant be the "truth" you are suggesting we adopt? Surely you jest?

Stop the mad compulsion to Frankenfashion everything, for you are not god and never will be! Yunno in play doughology even kids KNOW what happens when you mix all colors together...

I suggested before you do some Art Therapy in order to learn practical application of foundational truths - to sit here and dialogue with you when you REFUSE to do anything to help yourself out of your psychoses and dysfunction is pointless and only enables you.

On the other hand, if this "sincerity" you express is not just a guise used to come as a Wolf among the Sheep so you can "convert" us, dont bother.

We already KNOW what we believe and stand on it even though we are diverse in our beliefs. We've already reached this "Balance" you speak of and are exploring its upper reaches.

Face it, here, you will Fail if its your goal to convert us to your Frankenstoopidity, as surely as waves break upon bulwarks and rocks.

But keep going, reading and trying. Light might eventually seep into your compost and germinate the seeds of Truth found within. It is worth digging in the dirt to find Truth, especially one own dirt.

Its apparent still to me that you continue to view everything from the "outside-out" instead of from the outside-in+then+to+the+inside-out directions in your views on everything you express...Wheres the BALANCE in that?

Narcissism, preoccupied with self and selfs view of self, often poses as being preoccupied with the "world".

Read Christopher Lasch's "Culture of Narcissism". You can learn alot of Absolute Truth in there. THe underlying neuroses always changes with each age, but the underlying foundation of true healthiness and the ingredients that make it so do not.

You are Still trying to play the Mad Alchemist, wanting to trade "recipes" with us when we have Gourmet recipes we dont find any need to fiddle with. You'd definitely get booted off of Top Chef in the first episode, if you Cook as Sloppily and Madly as you Reason.

You can learn alot from watching Top Chef also, How to be a Gourmet Chef instead of a Bad Chef - the difference is in Judgment and Applied Perceptive Ability.

Also a Top Chef KNOWS the absolute ingredients and tools he works with - no frankenfashioning needed of the basic kitchen utensils. This beginning foundational "acceptance of tools/truth" allows him then to have a bit more liberty in what he concocts. He refines his judgment and perception (not to mention tastebuds) as he proceeds, becoming better, not worse, overall. In other words, he integrates certain elements as he goes and discovers unique flavors that are "good marriages." But he rejects the "bad marriages" along the way as well. He does NOT seek to take all the ingredients in the kitchen and dump them together like any toddler mighty do. You fancy yourself a Gourmet Chef - but you deny yourself the very tools of Truth to be able to cook well, so its no wonder your result is not "edible" to us.

Hope that helps bring it home in a practical way for you.

~ PsychoPrincess ~

12/21/2006 09:49:00 PM  
Blogger Van said...

[just found from post on the 18th] PsychoPrincess said... "VAN: E BURKE is excellent, have read & quoted him for years!! Glad to see him refd here - Lefties oughta READ sumfink REAL and DECENT instead Chomsky-smack!!"

Yeppers on that. His Reflections on the French Revolution are classic, but he also wrote some fascinating essays on, what today would be termed psychology & social science (For that matter Adam Smith was known more for his social science observations that what became capitalist economics). If you didn't know, Gutenberg.org has a large collection of Burke online , particularly of note, Inquiry into Ideas on the Sublime and Beautiful.

Thanks for the cafeine!

12/21/2006 09:54:00 PM  
Anonymous integralist said...

River Cocytus--yes, there are things that are true and those that are false. But it becomes tricky in terms of ideologies, of "mind stuff." We can say that it is true that the Earth orbits the Sun and that it is false that the Sun orbits the Earth; but can we say the same of beliefs, ideas, viewpoints, ideologies? This is where we must differentiate between "fact"--which relates to verifiable, concrete things--and "truth," which is much more nebulous.

My point about psychoprincess is that she is claiming her own personal truth is absolute. This is, to say the least, highly problematic.

You are, again, making the same mistake that I've now pointed out a few times: equating my view (because it is dissenting of the consensus view here) with Leftism. Why do you do this? Why do you say that Bob "is pointing out that a lot of what you are espousing is false, or perhaps not false so much as flat"? He only addressed me briefly a couple posts ago--and used me as a straw man. He actually thought I was someone else!

I will say it again, because it obviously still is not clear: I AM NOT A LEFTIST! I AM NOT ADVOCATING LEFTISM! The reason people don't get that here is because they aren't getting what I am saying (I have yet to hear someone who really understands where I am coming from...don't worry, I am at least partially responsible).

What I am saying is that the views expressed here--by Mr. Godwin and most of the contributors (I'll stop using pejoratives, unless it is specifically warranted)--are enormously partial, a flip-side Rightism to the Leftism that is made into a "demonology."

Or to put it in psychological terms, Leftism is merely the shadow of Rightism (what I am calling the shared worldview here, at least in its opposition to Leftism).

You know what is ironic? You think I still believe that the Sun goes around the Earth--when I think the same of you! What to do about that? Do we continue to bash our heads against eachother? Or do we try to come to some mutual understanding and even if we cannot agree on everything, or even most things, at least share mutual respect?

I agree with this advocation: ""Oh. I see what you mean. So how do you think all of it works?"

But the thing is, we should ALL be saying that--not simply Others. Is it not arrogant to assume that we are in the right, that we hold the truth? Should we not always and forevermore be vigilant to the possibility that we may not be seeing everything, that we may even be wrong?

We'll go a lot farther if we approach the Round Table with at least some degree of that sort of openness and, moreso, humility. I'm not saying that we should'nt believe what we believe, defend what we hold dear, make distinctions when they are necessary, but that we should hold a mutual openness and humility in our dealings with each other and recognize the simple fact that we cannot, ever, own truth. Truth owns us.

12/21/2006 10:01:00 PM  
Anonymous integralist said...

Mikez, an interesting proposition for you: what if we are all wrong? What if the Left and the Right and everywhere and anyone in between is flat-out wrong?

Should we not at least entertain that possibility? Do you know with absolute certainty that you are on the right side? Can one possibly know?

But this is not a problem if we don't see things in black vs. white terms, good vs. evil, right vs. wrong (or Right vs. Left). The reality is far more complex: infinite shades of grey and color. It is for us to decide what is truth, what is goodness, what is beautiful.

Am I sounding postmodern? Yes: I am saying that truth--at least relative truth--is largely constructed. We decide what is true, what is moral, what is aesthetic.

But unlike the postmodernists, I don't believe that is occuring in a void, a flatland of empty space and swirling balls of dirt. I believe, I intuit, that this is what God asks of us: to create, to co-create. To follow our own highest vision of Goodness, Truth, and Beauty.

Who can truly say that another person's vision is wrong? Or at least totally wrong?

The tricky part, of course, is creating in mutuality.

12/21/2006 10:10:00 PM  
Anonymous juliec said...

Integralist,

The point you are clearly missing here is simply this: (to paraphrase Mark Steyn) If you mix a quart of the world's finest ice cream with a quart of dog poop, the resulting mixture, one would expect, would taste far more like the latter than the former. One need not sample the mixture to understand that it would be vile.

In case you don't get my point: What you propose is that we take the "finer points" of leftism and mix them with the "finer points" of conservatism. We bobbleheads don't need to take a sample to understand that the mixture you propose would, in all likelihood, be unpalatable.

If there are specific leftist/ liberal ideas you think worthy of consideration, then by all means specify these ideas. So far, you keep parroting the idea that there is a happy middle ground between the leftism and conservatism. Of course there is a middle ground, but it still smells pretty ripe from where I'm standing.

12/21/2006 10:13:00 PM  
Anonymous integralist said...

Jorge, you're dancing with phantoms of your own creation...I think you, like Bobby, believe I am someone else.

12/21/2006 10:18:00 PM  
Anonymous integralist said...

Juliec, I understand that "everything but the kitchen sink" makes for bad soup. That is why parts of both need to be jettisoned in order to synthesize a greater whole. Or rather, it must be realized that both polarities are--as Ken Wilber would say--true but partial.

I am not even advocating a happy middle ground, but a dialectical synthesis which transcends and includes thesis and antithesis.

12/21/2006 10:35:00 PM  
Blogger ximeze said...

Inter said:"
The reason people don't get that here is because they aren't getting what I am saying"

I don't get what you're saying because: YOU'RE NOT MAKING SENSE.

More like you're trying to work out a Messianic complex: you'll put Your Hand on our heads, we'll hear Your Words of Wisdom, be converted to Inter's Way, become Your disciples & give our lives to spreading Your Word & Way.

Drop Dead, you too full of yourself bore.

Furthermore, I'm sick to death of gnats coming here & trying tell Bob what he should do & how he should be, to make THEM happy, always couched to sound oh so reasonable.

You can stuff your Round Table, as far a I'm concerned, along with your false humility & openness.

12/21/2006 11:09:00 PM  
Anonymous PsychoPrincess said...

TO ALL: Thanks for your support about a Princess Collection Blog. This is the 1st Blog I've actively ever wanted to participate & interact with, since I have Taste, so am still learning my way here.

I hope the Truth of the practical application of Submission which I often write on speaks sanity to many Lefty readers here, is a comfort & support to many of You, & teaches Know-how if its a Truth-Tool you are not as familiar w/applying actively.

INTRA-blogging is a bit tougher to incorporate in ones daily schedule, so for now, if you dont mind, I'd like to Rest Here, Heal. Absorb and Chew the cud w/other cows before I go back out on Cowpaign again amongst the Barbarian hordes I've only just recently come off the Battlefield from fighting. Eowyn in the House of Healing comes to mind...

I shall try harder to keep it shorter & chill out, my Gift to You all. I sincerely dont mean to tire/offend anyone due to length...(maybe its "length-envy?") & if only to give VAN some needed relief from Scrolling-Finger-Tunnel-Syndrome. Some subjects trigger the ire of the Princess more than others & I do try to make each SwordStroke count. But there is more to life than War.

Yes, women speak at least double the amount of words men speak - though I think Men here speak double the amount of words other men speak (they do it so well, at that!) Most others are Cro-Magnon in communication skills, IMHO.

A Womans giving-perspective is to share enuf info to enable others to Gain Skills to Apply them, to Encourage others to Gain Mastery by showing myriad ways one can apply a principle / concept to its fullest application -- You might call it: "BROAD Application"!

I'm sure I do not speak with the brevity Men do...I apologize if that is wrong.

I believe WILL said it best when he said: "...becuz women find talking itself is a healing factor, a balm. You might say this is a non-linear, trans-logical method of solving problems."

Men and Women along the Vertical are Wholistic. TRANSLOGICAL is the operative word, Thanks, Will! Is that word itself not indicative of "active application of the Vertical & Horizontal at once?"

Being in the Vertical Itself is Translogical, a balanced blend of the Apophatic & Kataphatic contexts of Truth/God - Reality & Mystery Blended in Balance (not enmeshed). Such vibrancy does take work to explain well to people in few words, hence I sit under G-Bobs hand & study technique as well as content.

Participating here is a definite Balm for me. Pehaps WILL understands the utter Gift of Balm to a woman who sees the Depths/Heights I do, yet who is not supported by living souls around her? A friend of mine used to nic me Icarus Girl becuz I reach so high.

My true only comfort so far until coming here have been the Bible, Books, Historical figures, Radio ministers, Talk shows, and 2 rather annoying but lovely Brothers who made me feel no longer alone though they still remind me I'm an anomaly.

OC being a Balm is the idea I tried to express in "The Blog in the Wilderness" poem I posted yesterday, out of gratitude for all here.

Whether with words, or brevity of word, Hope I'm Welcome here amongst You, even for a time, to be sharpened by You all, as Iron sharpens iron, to share what I have with You & receive what You give as we all attain Vertical dexterity of our shared Beliefs & Spiritual Viewpoints.

A Vertical Community if you will. Yes, eventually, I shall open a Princess Shop w/my own Blog, Books, a Princess Armory, etc. after I've rested & received humbling & sharpening under Your kind & capable hands & hearts, minds & mastery.

I am in awe to be here. YOU all are the Best Present a Princess could have hoped to receive after the long blight of battle. A House of Healing for us all. I am humbled & Grateful to G-BOB and all of You.

~ PsychoPrincess ~

12/21/2006 11:43:00 PM  
Anonymous PsychoPrincess said...

Hey VAN, Guttenberg.org ROCKS! Havent been there in a few months, thanks for the link & reminder! I shall be doing more reading on Burke, et al.

~ PsychoPrincess ~

NOTE: This IS my shortest post to date!

12/21/2006 11:47:00 PM  
Anonymous hoarhey said...

I know Exactly who you are.

12/21/2006 11:48:00 PM  
Anonymous PsychoPrincess said...

INTEGRALIST said: ..."My point about PsychoPrincess is that she is claiming her own personal truth is absolute."

This is again, where you are evidencing LIES, projections and warped twisted thinking & perceptions -- WHY do you insist to do this??

ANSWER that question & you will be on the right road to Truth.

You are Offended by Truth you CANT maninipulate!!! We've covered Narcissism and Juvenihilism in other posts...read. Learn. Pull head out.

PsychoPrincess NEVER Claimed "my own personal truth is Absolute." Get Real! You cant even read correctly or perceive what is actually being said - instead you constantly use your personal filters (aka FEARS) to read what You THINK is being said instead of what is Truth.

Absolute Truth stands, whether PsychoPrincess or You supports it or not. Its clearly NOT of my own manufacture - but YOU envy the strength it gives me to claim Absolute Truth IS Real, Not Relative.

Absolute Truth trumps Relativistic truth anyday, and they do have a relationship, but not an enmeshment. It seems to me you are the consummate baby wishing to integrate the oral and anal constantly then screaming in rage when you realize you cant; then psychotically trying to do it over and over and over.

We've grown up a bit from all that foolishness - you can too!

You have a problem dealing with the FACT that Absolute Truth IS itself; it is not in subjegation to relativistic truth at all. The other way around: Rel truth is subject to Absolute Truth and is a component of Absolute Truth.

If you deny Reality and instead choose to believe Fantasy (Relative truth), then Fantasy becomes God of your world and not Reality. Hence Relativism is HOW you think - it doesnt mean its correct or the highest expression of thought. All you think and do from that partial perspective is then distored, LACKING of Reality/Absolute Truth.

Invert your inverted paradigm. In other words: Pull you head out if you hope to know Higher Truth.

I know my head is not my ass, and my ass is not my head, and they are not relative - nor do they need to be integrated, for its absolute truth they both serve different functions and dont need to be enmeshed. I'm not arguing with that.

But you do!! And to us thats insane.

SouthPark illustrates it just as well when they portray the ButtHead people. Even Southpark writers GET what you refuse to understand.

I hope this makes it abundantly clear to you. We are trying to help.

~ PsychoPrincess ~

12/22/2006 12:05:00 AM  
Anonymous PsychoPrincess said...

INTEGRALIST said: "I am not even advocating a happy middle ground, but a dialectical synthesis which transcends and includes thesis and antithesis.

DUH. That is what we already believe and why we serve Absolute Truth! It integrates relavistic truth and trumps it. Why do stay in denial of FACT?

Your goal as stated above seems noble; but as Ximeze points our correctly, you are not Jesus/God and are way off base to come here & think to convert us to "your truth."

HINT: The gross projection you levelled at me is Actually TRUE of You. I did not level nor make the projection - You did - and it is FACT that projections originate from their personal source of woundedness, i.e., from a wounded Pride/Ego.

You are again ASSuming Absolute Truth does Not already synthesize thesis & antithesis successfully. Absolute Truth does - THATS WHY ITS CALLED ABSOLUTE TRUTH. It is the Whole & and parts. But it does not enmesh things the way you think - the "integration" you speak of is enmeshment, not unique balance/counterpoise. THAT is a context hard to illustrate well for it is found further into Absolute Truths being, further up the Vertical.

Absolute Truth already exists and trumps whatever play-truth you or I can come up with - so why be senseless trying to construct your own truth and impose it upon the world or upon other truths? You make the same repeated mistake in that you REFUSE to deal with Absolute Truth - Becuz it trumps your own. It doesnt need your help to do what IT already does quite well!

Absolute Truth IS the TRUTH you Seek yet chronically Reject.

I feel compassion for You, becuz you are choosing to be trapped in a terrible conundrum even though the "way out" of it is offered you. Yet you reject it - becuz you refuse Absolute Truth for your own personal reasons.

Conundrum & compulsion is what you suffer, the price you choose to pay when you serve the god of Relativism.

Truth still stands as Truth beyond your refusal to acknowledge its Reality.

Since you reject it chronically, You dont really seek Truth, then.

The addict who swears they want to heal but relapses again and again are not seeking True Healing (usually).

This delusional way of thought you adopt and cling to for dear life is the result of Relavistic truth infectin your soul.

You must leave your madness behind if you wish to get Well. Nebuchadnezzar understood that reality, so did the Apostle Paul, hence its possible for you to do as well.

You are capable to choose/embrace a new healthier choice (LIBERTY) - THE Choice - THE Gourmet Choice of Truth - which is Absolute Truth as it trumps whatever partial truths any of us "come up with" and wish to call "Truth." You must drop the lies and exchange them for Truth.

Absolute Truth IS what you seek - but unfortunately you do not know it, and since you fear it/reject it, you have no comfort, and instead choose to try to force a "new truth" when it is not necessary.

The First Step of Healing & SANITY in AA: To Thoroughly Admit "We are powerless..." to make It happen the way we think and must embrace an INTERdependency with Higher Power / God / AbsoluteTruth, or else stay insane and addicted to relativistic truth-as-god (RelativISM which is to say, we prefer to be interdependent / codependent with Evil.) Not Good.

That is why I speak of Submission of Your Will to Gods Will, to HIS Truth instead of your own, cuz you arent god, and you cant trump Him. Rather He trumps us all. Some of us accept that and grow. Others reject it and grow twisted.

Denying Truth does not Reality magke. Submitting self to It That Already Exists ...Ah, there is when one begins on the Path of Wisdom & Real Truth instead of trying to insanely make an alternate truth, or convince others some lesser truth is Wise. To do that means you are following in Evils footsteps - as Manipulation and Rebelion instead of Submission is what Evil does. It does not do nor cannot do nor ever BE what Truth IS.

Nor does Truth need any more clever counterfeits. Counterfeit truth never trumps Absolute Truth - Absolutely!

~ PsychoPrincess ~

12/22/2006 12:48:00 AM  
Anonymous Alan said...

Integralist: How about naming some aspect of Leftism that you think is better than Rightism?

My bet is that your understanding of "Rightism", at least as advocated here by Bob, is incorrect but I'm willing to talk specifics.

BTW, Is this post the one with the most comments evaaar?

12/22/2006 01:28:00 AM  
Blogger George Breed said...

Hey, flame warriors! Happy solstice!

I found this site to be fun:
http://redwing.hutman.net/~mreed/index.htm

12/22/2006 03:28:00 AM  
Blogger River Cocytus said...

"River Cocytus--yes, there are things that are true and those that are false. But it becomes tricky in terms of ideologies, of "mind stuff." We can say that it is true that the Earth orbits the Sun and that it is false that the Sun orbits the Earth; but can we say the same of beliefs, ideas, viewpoints, ideologies? This is where we must differentiate between "fact"--which relates to verifiable, concrete things--and "truth," which is much more nebulous."

Actually, yes, you can. The whole point of transcendent positions is that they allow view of the whole, no matter what it is.

But, alas, I am finished. This lion is tired.

To wit: Truth is only nebulous when you don't know it.

When you do, it is as clear as day.

12/22/2006 04:40:00 AM  
Blogger River Cocytus said...

Two things:

1. The psychoprincess actually made me blush the other day! (That's tough to do ! :P)

and

2. I know (but will not tell!) The super-secret location of the (developing?) princess blog. [I happened to click the right link at the right time. Go figure!]

And it looks awesome!

Ok. Later.

12/22/2006 04:54:00 AM  
Anonymous Joan of Argghh! said...

The last person that tried to um.. er.. integrate good and evil into one being was Dr. Frankenstein, I believe.

To the same effect.

12/22/2006 05:12:00 AM  
Blogger Gagdad Bob said...

Integralist--

Speaking only for myself, I don't understand you because you are too vague, shallow, abstract, and contradictory.

As I said before, instead of critiquing my concrete views in the most abstract and airy-fairy way, I again request that you tell us concretly what you believe and why you believe it, so that we may show you the error of your ways. Otherwise it's like shooting bullets at a fog bank.

12/22/2006 05:23:00 AM  
Blogger Van said...

My Wife calls me a Flogger - I'll continue beating a point to death and beyond, as long as the person is still standing in front of me and hasn't yet said "Oh, I see what you mean". Gagdad has tried to cure me of this, but I feel a recidivism coming on...

12/22/2006 06:08:00 AM  
Blogger Van said...

Oh Great and powerful Yottle! Hollowed be they Form! As I know you to be oblong and laced rather than sperical & stiched (as the heathen portray you), I pray you will bless me in this next comment, and watch over me - may my kicks bring field goals, and may the hated Lucy not withdraw you from my swinging foot at the last moment....

12/22/2006 06:10:00 AM  
Blogger Van said...

Integralist said..."I will say it again, because it obviously still is not clear: I AM NOT A LEFTIST! I AM NOT ADVOCATING LEFTISM!"

You seem perplexed about why we've labeled you a leftist. A question of course needs to be what is leftism? The impression I get is that you seem to think it depends merely on whether or not you'd like to vote for AlGore one more time - but that is only a concrete (blockhead) effect of leftism.

We don't define leftists as those who buy into man-made global warming or advocates of welfare or wackademic PC speak, these are but common manifestations of leftist thought. The principles behind them, which make such thought possible and inevitable, are what defines leftist thinking. Want an example? Here:

"...not a problem if we don't see things in black vs. white terms, good vs. evil, right vs. wrong (or Right vs. Left). The reality is far more complex: infinite shades of grey and color."

"Am I sounding postmodern? Yes: I am saying that truth--at least relative truth--is largely constructed. We decide what is true, what is moral, what is aesthetic."

"Who can truly say that another person's vision is wrong? Or at least totally wrong?"

"I am not even advocating a happy middle ground, but a dialectical synthesis which transcends and includes thesis and antithesis."

Viola! Leftist thought! Since those words be yours, ipso facto, you be a leftist! Despite your pragmatic suggestions to take a bit of this philosophy and a touch of that, or rather emphatically BECAUSE OF THAT, you define yourself as a leftist! This is Leftism! Look it up in the sacred Archive and Reliquarium!

If there are principles you'd like to discuss, why is principle important, why is attempting to violate principle by fusing fundamentally opposing thesis and antithesis as the great bonehead Hegel & progeny advocated, that might be of interest to discuss - but discussing how to go about doing that which we are fundamentally opposed to, disgusted by, and deeply dead-set against is a non-starter from the get go.

We do hold absolutely that Truth is, and that deliberately setting out to mix shades of grey is literally unthinkable. I commented earlier on this page about truth, and its contextual nature, but you seem to interpret ABSOLUTE TRUTH as a cosmic regulation written into law, which we unyieldingly demand everyone to operate by at all times and in all places - that again is leftist thinking. It is principle, principle that is inductively identified within actual reality and applies to any relevant situation, not deductively assertions which are brittle and inflexible, which we seek to identify and live up to.

"Congress shall make no law abridging the freedom of speech" is an application of a Classical Liberal Principle.

"At no time shall said person contribute in excess of $100,000 dollars to a campaign x number of times within a given year, and political campaign ads may not be aired less than 30 prior to an election, thus enabling free and fair elections" (or words to that affect) is an example of Leftist ideology.

The two are not compatible. Period.

One last question, Who the heck is Jorge?

12/22/2006 06:11:00 AM  
Anonymous Boromir said...

Here's a specific question on Bobbist thought regarding evolution versus creationism:
Do those who consistently (read "joyously") pounce on opposing thought come here that way, or are these dark warriors summoned to life by the single drumbeat of the present environment?

Some truth is absolute. Other truth is belief. In the sorting lies the rub.

Here's one for you to decide on: Play nice. God won't think less of you.

12/22/2006 06:37:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"We can say that it is true that the Earth orbits the Sun and that it is false that the Sun orbits the Earth"

Actually, in any systems where one object A orbits another object B, it is correct to say both that A orbits B and B orbits A.

Physics 101.

12/22/2006 06:48:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"My point about psychoprincess is that she is claiming her own personal truth is absolute. This is, to say the least, highly problematic."

It's not her own personal truth. It's her realization of Absolute Truth reflected through her personality.

12/22/2006 06:50:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"Do we continue to bash our heads against eachother? Or do we try to come to some mutual understanding and even if we cannot agree on everything, or even most things, at least share mutual respect?"

I don't think us Rightists are all that interested in sharing mutual understanding with you. You are just plain wrong. And until you accept that, there is no ground common ground to start from.

And mutual respect? You'll forgive me if I don't have much respect for ignorance.

12/22/2006 06:54:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Oh,

And I am not white. And I am under 25.

Although neither of those banalities matter much.

The relationship between age and skin color and psycho-spiritual maturity evades me.

12/22/2006 07:01:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"It is for us to decide what is truth, what is goodness, what is beautiful."

No. It is not.

It is for us decipher between the Truth and Lie, Good and Evil, Beauty and Ugliness.

We may use our judgement to evaluate levels or shades of Truth, Goodness or Beauty.

But we are just the interpreter.

O precedes k. Form precedes forms. Truth precedes Truth.

12/22/2006 07:07:00 AM  
Anonymous Newbie said...

What I am left with after reading for a few days on this blog is two lasting impressions:

1) Dr. Robert Godwin sure is smart.

2) If his philosphies become widespread, we are truly in the final days, as this is one caustic, confrontational group of followers.

Which leads me to this conclusion: Conservative values have never justified anger in my own life. I am in the wrong crowd. Good Bye.

12/22/2006 07:14:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"I am not even advocating a happy middle ground, but a dialectical synthesis which transcends and includes thesis and antithesis."

No. You are not. You are advocating a metaphycical fracturing of the whole which debases both the "thesis and antithesis."

The ideas Bob's writes about are ALREADY a transcendant
"dialectical synthesis"

Even if, as I said before, you are too myopic to recognize it.

12/22/2006 07:15:00 AM  
Anonymous georged said...

Ohh newbie, You are so high minded, so pure so at peace, ....
....so self righteous. Beat it!

12/22/2006 07:32:00 AM  
Anonymous Newbie said...

gorged:

I don't think I said that I was not capable of rolling in the dirt.

Tis the season for feasting. Truth: you're stewing in your own juice.

It would some Truths don't go down as easily as others, no matter what crowd you follow.

And thanks for the invite. I found my way here. I can find my way out, Bob willing.

12/22/2006 07:44:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"If his philosphies become widespread, we are truly in the final days, as this is one caustic, confrontational group of followers."

We are not followers. Just like-minded seekers.

12/22/2006 07:47:00 AM  
Blogger Van said...

ok for all of you who gripe about tone and confrontation, anger, etc... picture this, if you will:

A group of friends and aquaintences gather around the bar in a friends home, they've gotten together to talk about things of mutual interest in politics, religion dealing with rotovirus, stuff like that. Some know each other well, others only through other aquaintences, some have much to say, some more enjoy listening & only occasionally pipe up with a comment. Some may be surepticiously imbibing adult beverages, perhaps even mass quantities.

Got the picture in your mind? Ok, here's a question:
Do you imagine this large gathering to be sitting there, hands in lap, calmly, dispassionately and above all very politely in ever level volume and tones?

Or do you imagine a lively, sometimes racous exchange - sometimes heated, sometimes jovial, some trading of recreational slamming - occasionally even someone getting a tad offended and stepping out into the night air to calm down (the people fundamentally have respect and consideration for the friends house, if not all gathered there and so would not engage in vicious insults and profanity), then returning to the gathering?

I would expect the 2nd. I would run from the 1st as proof that the invasion of the body snatchers had come to pass. To all who are so easily offended, if you prefer the 1st group... I suggest you go and find it.

12/22/2006 07:51:00 AM  
Anonymous walt said...

Uh, what Van just said, el mucho.

12/22/2006 08:06:00 AM  
Anonymous PsychoPrincess said...

RIVER-C: Hail Bro! So you found my page, heheheh? Its soooo Under Construction, but thanks for your compliments! It feels like I'm cyber preggers - Hey can I eat for two now? At least until zee Princess Blog is born...See what YOU Guys have created?

VAN: ROFL!! FLOGGER!! LOVE THAT!! Hilarious! OMG - high-5 your wife for me! Toooo funny. You and RIVER-C said alot of GREAT stuff on Aristotle and the Objective / Subjective Truth relationships they integrate.

Now about this "Flogger" thing: From a Shrinks perspective: Hmmmm...Whats THIS?? (Opens Vans desk drawer.) A WHIP I see hidden in your desk drawer under your computer? *Shocked* C'mon, Fess up VAN: You KNOW You like to Crack That Whip when you're flogging!

* * * * * *

Okay. Christening Time, Princess Style:

G-BOB = KRESKIN. GOD-FADDER. FATHER-GUIDO. UNCLE OVERALLS milking his Cow. THE ORACLE of OC. DR WORDSWORTH.

VAN THE MAN = DA WHIP. WEBSTER. FLOGGER. BRAINIAC - Cuz he has a portable library lurking in his brain and hes like a bottomless pit of Knowledge. JAVA-JUNKIE for short, cuz he needs Caffeine!

WILL = DR BOEHME. SAINT WILLIAM. DR JONES - He writes of Spiritual / Metaphysical angles & fits all together well. Hes a MetaPhysician & Christian Shaman. But dont call him Billy. PROPHET OF HIS SERENE HIGHNESS YOTTLE.

COUSIN DUPREE = AGENT SMITH? - Theres much more to CD than meets the Blog. He strikes me as SECRETARY of STATE type of man. BIG CHEESE for short. GRANDE POOBAH OF THE RACOON LODGE.

NOMO = GMAN-JR. JUNIOR for short. MR MIYAGI - cuz hes a man of few words. Think: "Wax on, Wax off. Nuff said." NUFF-SAID-NOMO.

USS BEN = BROTHER GILLIGAN. BOAT BOYEEE. FOO-FIGHTER (That pic of the foot to the jaw, priceless). WHITEY short for dress whites.

DICENTRA = LADY BOLOKs - Thats Kolob spelled backwards for the BOM in You. Shortened to LADY DaBOMb.

JOAN OF ARRGGHH!! = MYSTERESS. FIRST LADY of OC / LADY RACOON (but dont call her Lady Fuzzybutt.)

COSANOSTRADAMUS = PHANTOM PROPHET - with a name like that, hes really a Black Ops undercover Ninja/MafiaDon who can predict someones Future while he carves em up...in French AND in Italian, mind you! HITMAN of OC.

RIVER-COCYTUS: MAESTRO (for his love of Bach.) SAINT ANGELIS (for Angelis Laudentes of Music & Art.) DEFENDER OF MUSLIM WOMEN (He makes the Arab Wiminz do their holler when he walks by.) SIR LIONHEART, a Knight after King Richard.

UNCLE CRAYFISH = CRAWDADDIO. CRABBY for short or when hes miffed.

DILYS = LADY NIMBLEFINGERS - Shes always counting on them & her toes! LADY_SLIPPER due to her Flowers pic!

XIMEZE = LADY DALRYMPLE - due to her love for TD. "DROP_DEAD_FRED!" as she told em to "Stuff his round table."

MIKEZ = ZEE-MAN - hes the GO-TO-GUY as hes Got the Goodz & all kindz of info. More nics for him to come.

LUKEBLOGWALKER: LUKE_BIBLE_SCHOLAR - for his love of Greek/Hebrew/Bibles. GEEK-BOYEE (after his love of Greek & Gadgets.) SNOREDY-BOREDY-BOY - cuz he Snores alot when hes Bored on the Blog.

JULIEC = JULIA-CHILDS & STEYNER_GIRL for her memorable Ice Cream & Dog Poop quote from Mark Steyn. JULES for short.

Okay, if I Missed Anyone, Nevah Feah: Princess WILL get You Laterz!! I'll be Bahk!

BTW: WHO is Petey? (Is that J.Peden?) Also GRANDE POOBAH of the Racoon Lodge.

~ PsychoPrincess ~

12/22/2006 08:11:00 AM  
Anonymous juliec said...

Sounds like a blast, Van (I guess that's why I'm still hanging around ;-)

I'd like to add, though, that at this gathering, occasionally there are crashers who wander in, hurl around a bunch of insults, eat all of the cocktail shrimp and (horror of horrors) disrespect Yottle! Of course we're going to be a little touchy when that happens! Yet still, often, I see members of the group invite said crashers to get hold of themselves so that a good time might be had by them, too.

12/22/2006 08:13:00 AM  
Anonymous integralist said...

You missed the most important person here, ME!

12/22/2006 08:17:00 AM  
Blogger NoMo said...

Bob...uh, Bob. I think someone's about to hijack your posse. Bob?

12/22/2006 08:27:00 AM  
Blogger ELC said...

I quote some of JFK's inaugural address on my home page. If anybody nowadays said what JFK said in 1961, he would be excoriated by the Left as imperialistic, warmongering, hegemonic, etc.

On the other hand, one of my theories about why the Left hates George W. Bush so much is that he actually DOES the kinds of things JFK only talked about.

12/22/2006 08:27:00 AM  
Blogger Van said...

Juliec said..."...I'd like to add, though, that at this gathering, occasionally there are crashers who wander in, hurl around a bunch of insults, eat all of the cocktail shrimp and (horror of horrors) disrespect Yottle! "

That's when Cousin DuPree and Hoarhey lift them up under the armpits, take 'em upstairs and heave them off the deck.

12/22/2006 08:47:00 AM  
Blogger dicentra63 said...

"It is for us to decide what is truth, what is goodness, what is beautiful."

No. It is not.

It is for us decipher between the Truth and Lie, Good and Evil, Beauty and Ugliness.


I would replace the word "decipher" with "discern." It's not a riddle, it's a glass through which we see darkly. Apply some light, and you can begin to see what is what, the way you can tell what's in a room after you light a candle, whereas before you were stumbling around in the dark, trying to figure out what it was you were stumbling into.

You don't "decide" what is a chair or what is a throw rug, you discern it.

12/22/2006 08:50:00 AM  
Blogger Van said...

dicentra63 said...
"It is for us decipher between the Truth and Lie, Good and Evil, Beauty and Ugliness....You don't "decide" what is a chair or what is a throw rug, you discern it."

Very good.

Somewhere Gagdad used the alternate image of not a visual comparison, but an auditory one.
As you listen to a AM radio, you get a tiny impression of the basic melody, seems to be constant single tones, etc, kinda catchy.

Later you hear it playing somewhere in the distance, this time on a good sound system. As you walk nearer the tune gains more definition - where you thought you'd heard a simple tone, you discover it is made of chords. Closer still, you discover harmonies. Still closer you notice flutes in the background, kettle drums, oboe's, a Rickenbacher bass riff (#What's that doing there!#), etc.

You like the tune so much you go see the concert live, and discover the rich sounds you'd heard on the stereo were pale in comparison to hearing it live. You become a musician and discover subtleties of technique that a listener would never be aware of, etc, etc, etc.

The original tune didn't change one whit from what was heard on Aristotle's AM Radio, but our ability to discern its meaning and depth does as we come nearer to the source.

12/22/2006 09:32:00 AM  
Anonymous PsychoPrincess said...

BOROMIR: Some LOTR Trivia:

Q: What do you get when you mix an Elf with a Troll?

A: A Dumbed-down Orc who is Spiritually retarded/disabled! Went down the wrong way on the Spiritual food chain.

* * * * *

Q: What do you get when you cross an Elf with a Wizard?

A: Masters, such as Gandalf the White and Elrond of Rivendell (3,000 yrs old!) Wise Warriors who went Right way up the Spiritual food chain.

Gee, even Tolkien "got" what we are saying and put the same concepts into his books & characters. He was a Master Philologist & studied human character along with Languages & the power of myth, legends & stories to teach people on Spiritual matters.

Any questions on Why not to mix certain things together?

BOROMIR said:..."Some truth is Absolute. Some truth is belief."

Yes, thats what we've been saying, some Truth is Absolute, some truth is relative ("beliefs that change" are relativistic) - Both Truth & truth are encompassed in Absolute Truth View - G-BOBs Integralism. More than "just a political stance" its a Spiritual Evolutionary Paradigm.

BOROMIR Said: "...Do those who consistently pounce on opposing thoughts come here that way, or are these Dark Warriors summoned to life by the single drumbeat of the present environment?"

I can only speak for myself and as a Princess of the Peeps I belong to and Represent: Neither choice you provide is correct. Most of us are "Summoned to Life" OUT OF the darkness of Self by God/Christ/HolySpirit. We are summoned to Life unto, by, for & with Christ. In this New Life, thru Spiritually wholistic organic relationship w/Him, we Study, Grow, come to Know Spiritual Absolute Truths which trump everymans relativistic truth, Truths that Transform our self into Spirit - Truths that Transform our spirits into Transcendence.

The Transcendent Integration of Spirit and Life. Again, as I said on yesterdays blog: We are a Nexxus, a CruxPoint. To call us Right, or Left or even Liberal (by todays defs) are wrong, for we are none of them. We transcend them and are something else, we call "Integralism."

Spiritual Integralism: "We live and breathe this stuff!" (borrowed from Advance Copier commercial).

~ PsychoPrincess ~

12/22/2006 09:49:00 AM  
Anonymous PsychoPrincess said...

BOROMIR: Some LOTR Trivia:

Q: What do you get when you mix an Elf with a Troll?

A: A Dumbed-down Orc who is Spiritually retarded/disabled! Went down the wrong way on the Spiritual food chain.

* * * * *

Q: What do you get when you cross an Elf with a Wizard?

A: Masters, such as Gandalf the White and Elrond of Rivendell (3,000 yrs old!) Wise Warriors who went Right way up the Spiritual food chain.

Gee, even Tolkien "got" what we are saying and put the same concepts into his books & characters. He was a Master Philologist & studied human character along with Languages & the power of myth, legends & stories to teach people on Spiritual matters.

Any questions on Why not to mix certain things together?

BOROMIR said:..."Some truth is Absolute. Some truth is belief."

Yes, thats what we've been saying, some Truth is Absolute, some truth is relative ("beliefs that change" are relativistic) - Both Truth & truth are encompassed in Absolute Truth View - G-BOBs Integralism. More than "just a political stance" its a Spiritual Evolutionary Paradigm.

BOROMIR Said: "...Do those who consistently pounce on opposing thoughts come here that way, or are these Dark Warriors summoned to life by the single drumbeat of the present environment?"

I can only speak for myself and as a Princess of the Peeps I belong to and Represent: Neither choice you provide is correct. Most of us are "Summoned to Life" OUT OF the darkness of Self by God/Christ/HolySpirit. We are summoned to Life unto, by, for & with Christ.

In this New Life, thru Spiritually wholistic organic relationship w/Him, we Study, Grow, come to Know Spiritual Absolute Truths which trump everymans relativistic truth, Truths That Transform our self into Spirit - Truths that Transform our Spirits into Transcendence.

We are the Transcendent Integration of Spirit and Life. Again, as I said on yesterdays blog: We are a Nexxus, a CruxPoint. To call us Right, or Left or even Liberalism (by todays defs) are wrong, for we are none of them. Neither are we Theonomists (the combo of Spiritual/political and economic).

We transcend them and are something else we call "Integralism."

Spiritual Integralism: "We live and breathe this stuff!" (borrowed from Advance Copier commercial).

~ PsychoPrincess ~

12/22/2006 09:52:00 AM  
Blogger ximeze said...

Newbie said:"as this is one caustic, confrontational group of followers.
Which leads me to this conclusion: Conservative values have never justified anger in my own life. I am in the wrong crowd. Good Bye."

More Weeniedom


See ya

12/22/2006 09:56:00 AM  
Anonymous Robert A. said...

Sorry Van, Bobbleheads. I agree with most of what is said here (and the rest maybe I just don't understand yet), but as for your tidy description of this blog as a coctale party, Truth is that this blog doesn't fit either of those sinarios you described. The regulars on this site come across as an angry bunch of people, not some gathering of friends and aquaintances, not a "lively, sometimes raucous exchange". This from someone who has not contributed, for this very reason. That yoiu won't see this side of your group personality means you can't change it. Your harsh tone damages the foundation of everything you say. If we follow the example set forth here, Christ, as the ultimate enlightened one, must have had more reason than anyone on this site to be angry and intolerant with those less enlightned than he. Yet over and over His example is of tolerance and forgiveness. Look at his relationship with his disciples. "Come unto me as a child." Whenever someone comes in here as a child, he is slapped first for being a child. Whatever learning follows is a credit to the student, not you people as teachers. And lest you criticise me for my "opinion", the record is there for the reading. You all helped write it.

So please don't offer up someone else's venom as proof that they are imbalanced while justifying your own as somehow sanctified because you are "righting" some "dense" comment.

Write on, Bob. The rest of you Bobbleheads, I would strive to be like the second group Van describes and not so much like a lynch mob.

So have at it. Here's a criticism from someone who largely agrees with you, stated as directly as I can state it without being unneccessarily confrontational. I can already predict the tone and membership of the response. There's a problem no one here seems to be able to fix, no matter how smart you believe yourselves to be. One doesn't Think one's way to enlightenment. It's still a three-part being that reaches Heaven as an individual, not a mass ascension of nick-named buddies.

12/22/2006 10:32:00 AM  
Blogger Van said...

Robert A.,
Just curious, Typo's or puns? "coctale party... sinarios"

The moneychangers in the temple does come to mind, but not important. Obviously everyone can choose where to stay, leave, or call DuPree for intervention.

Personally I'd just rather continue the conversation.

12/22/2006 10:42:00 AM  
Blogger River Cocytus said...

I'm going to be totally serious
For just a moment
And declare (or perhaps aver)
That we have only one troll.
He's really, really schizophrenic.

Either that
Or Iowahawk develops a new 'tonic'
every day.

(Inpsalting!)

12/22/2006 11:29:00 AM  
Anonymous Robert A. said...

Well done Van, in the spirit of the second category. (I'll do my best to watch the tipos.)

Everyone always cites Jesus and the temple as an example of the Wrath of Christ. But the record of Jesus' life as portrayed in the Bible shows that trait as the exception.

Personally I find his interaction with his disciples as most the revealing of his human temperament. How could twelve guys be so dumb? Look at Peter's behavior in the Garden. Time and again He gave these guys the opportunity to gather wisdom and insight, and time and again they concerned themselves with trivialities. But he never gave up on them (I'm not a bible scholar, but will go back and find references if I need to make that point) or lost patience outwardly. I want to believe that any "seeker" would have done better, would have asked better questions of Him. Yet somehow after his crucifixion, the message seemed to get through to these guys, and they were able to carry on His work. This aspect of the story provides proof of the "Holy Spirit" aspect of man-the change in them came - apparently - not through their intellect, but through some metaphysical shift in their understanding. Did they "earn" this, or did Jesus Will it upon them? Did they have to pass some test, or were they simply in the right place at the right time?

Do we need to go outside to settle this, or are you gonna quit being so stingy with that hip flask? I can't stomach Lite Beer.

12/22/2006 11:29:00 AM  
Blogger River Cocytus said...

Robert: No man's soul was ever saved BY the forum.

But no doubt some man's soul was saved at the forum.

And no, we're not angry. We're just not tame. Tough!

12/22/2006 11:32:00 AM  
Anonymous PsychoPrincess said...

VAN: Will be reading on Your Blog today in a bit, between bites and before my next session. Just going to get sumfink to eat and will be back to peruse.

LOVE WHAT YOU AND USS.BEN wrote about "not feeling integrated after your bean burritos!" ROFL!!

BTW, I'm going to Guido-Burrito! Maybe I should go to KFC? Subway? (The ones you mentioned in another post.)

Wait, OO OO I Know: After Princess eats Spicy Hot Pakistani Food - Ohhhh Yes! Then I FEEL "The Integration" happenin! You guys would love it too cuz you arent weenie-types. It really is kinda...um...Spiritual, among "other" things. :>)

Croikee! "Somewhere else" feels The Burn of what ISN'T integrated, too!

Princess Says: "Whatever isnt Integrated, must be Eliminated!"

~ PsychoPrincess ~

ROBERT A: Waaay off base, to see Jesus so one-sided. Lest you deceive yourself further into the modern "Wimpy Jesus" pop-paradigm usually believed in by Leftist Christians / Churchianity, here is a corrective for your own myopathy, straight from Jesus & Scripture:

Speaking to the Pharisees, the educated learned religious leaders & supposed-to-be-Believers-in-Meshiah of Jesus day...Jesus Called Them:
"Hypocrits! Brood of Vipers! Snakes! You Are The Rot Inside of the Grave. Unclean. An Adulterous Generation. Unfaithful. Harlots. Prostitutes. Satan. Tares. Demonically posessed. Ungrateful. Deaf. Blind. Dumb. Usurpers. UnKnowing (Stoopid). Not Wise. Counterfeits. Charlatans. Fakers. Devious. Clever. Speaking with the mouth of Satan. Evildoers. Schemers. Scammers. Wolves in Sheeps Clothing. Guilty. Evil. Full of Dead Mens Bones (as in mass graves of holocausts/war). Traitors. Murderers. Poisonous. Leprous. Diseased Spiritually. Rebellious. Sons of Satan, their Father..."

Need I go on to prove your "assertions" of "wimpy" Jesus as "tolerant and forgiving" is off base?

Jesus is also: A King, with Fire in His Eyes, and a Sword from His Mouth...Justice!

Did you "forget" to see all sides to Christ? I know it happens nowadays if one is not careful to think carefully.

We all need to SEE and KNOW Him more in 3-D or 4-D experiential relationship as wholistically as possible, instead of ones ego/pride's piecemeal and linear-limited perspectives, as ones self often assumes erroneously. 1/2 truths are still Lies. Satan even wraps his "nuggets o truth" with layers of Lies, and peddles them as "Truth."

Good thing I dont eat nuggets. :D

Jesus IS the King. He IS Justice. Wimpy Anemic Jesus is not the Jesus True Christianity serves & loves. I do not know this "Wimpy" Jesus you speak of.

12/22/2006 11:32:00 AM  
Anonymous PsychoPrincess said...

ROBERTA: Jesus most certainly did "lose patience" with Peter:

"Get Thee behind me Satan! You are a stumbling block (barrier) to me. You do not have the things of God in mind but the things of men/satan."

Thats just one example, You can look up the rest yourself, there are many. If you make effort for careful biblical study, your limited flat views will grow also, and I think your experience of Him will as well.

It seems you do not take the pieces and integrate them into a coherent whole picture of Christ, so your vision of Christ is partial, at best, and not integral nor wholistic.

Theres no insult here, so dont read any into it.

~ P2 ~

12/22/2006 11:44:00 AM  
Blogger River Cocytus said...

As one man wiser than he knew quipped at bowling:
"Don't F*** with the Jesus!"

12/22/2006 11:47:00 AM  
Anonymous Robert A. said...

P2:

Thanks for the comments. Particularly the second one. Much more in keeping with an attitude of exchange rather than one-upsmanship, which does wonders for opening one up to new ideas.

My relationship with Christ has been tainted via Churchianity. Regarding Jesus, I have had to toss out all I learned in the first half of my life to move forward in the second half. Only in the last decade have I learned to let Jesus as Christ back in again without prejudice. You are right, I do not understand Jesus in the way you describe. I am not opposed to this HardAss Jesus...I just haven't heard those stories. Let me sit with these ideas, let me read more about Jesus as the Buford Pusser of Nazareth.

RiverC: Is this a timely way of saying, "Bless all those who abide, liberal or conservative"?

12/22/2006 12:40:00 PM  
Blogger ximeze said...

Robert A

I feel the need to clarify something: not all regulars here are followers of Christ, or are primarily interested in Christian theology.

I, for one, read Bob for his grasp on the Logos & its Universal nature, how it shows up pretty much everywhere & throughout time.

At this point, in my life, I would call myself a Christian, perhaps for want of a "better" word. The various denominational squabbles just seem to point to something much bigger, behind all that, which is what I'm looking for.

Frankly, I'm not in the business of collecting scalps for Jesus, and thus concerned about how this group might sound. I am here for purely selfish reasons, for my own intellectual & spiritual benefit.

In my own case, the draw was uncontrollable, something that just would not go away, no matter how hard I tried to push back. It felt like a net being pulled in around me, ever tighter, kicking & screaming every inch of the way.

It certainly was not what I would have chosen & no "body" brought me to the Light thru their snag & thus, to "right dogma" of their particular creed.

It's the "That Behind All That" which is of interest to me. The capacity to resonate with the call comes from somewhere other than myself, prevenient grace, if you will.

I read the Bible for its putting forth of the Logos, for its wisdom targeting the human condition & for its ability to reframe ideas.

I wear a Cross around my neck, not to broadcast my status to believers, but as a constant reminder to myself, like a beeper set to go off at regular times.

My birth family never mention that Cross, except to say "it's very pretty" & have never asked me what it's all about. Likely, they've discussed it between themselves, but I don't know what they conclude. Maybe they think I'm nuts. Certainly, I would seem the least likely amongst the set to have gone this way. Go figure.

Anyway, just wanted to clarify.
And that trinket I wear IS very pretty.

12/22/2006 01:25:00 PM  
Anonymous Susan Lee said...

robert a. said; "Write on, Bob. The rest of you Bobbleheads, I would strive to be like the second group Van describes and not so much like a lynch mob."

Well, I don't post much (ever?) but I get a WHOLE lot out of each original Post, modified by the comments. I think it's JUST like a bar party, and I am smiling the whole time I read the comments! Y'alls personalities come out so clearly, and I'm very fond of all of you. I guess it depends on how much fear you have when you enter here whether you see the bar party or a lynch mob?

12/22/2006 01:50:00 PM  
Blogger ximeze said...

Hi Susan Lee

Your personality shows too.

Welcome aboard.

12/22/2006 02:15:00 PM  
Blogger Van said...

I pretty much (No jewelry around my neck) second what Ximeze said.

Susan Lee ;-)

Looks like about 175 posts Gagdad, does Cousin DuPree get a percentage of the cover charge per Head? (if so you might want to lock the garage... put up a sign that says "No Murphy Bed In Here"; you know how he gets with money in his pockets - no offense Cousin)

Leaving the office - MERRY (last working day before)CHRISTMAS!!!

12/22/2006 03:33:00 PM  
Blogger Van said...

... and also what Susan Lee said - I really enjoy the company here, on top of the content - Thanks for letting us use your Philosophy Bar Bob!

12/22/2006 03:35:00 PM  
Blogger River Cocytus said...

Robert A: I'm not much for those labels, but... eh. Look, I'm no fascist or whatnot-- and of course, this is not my blog.

But that aside, I welcome anyone to reply to any of my posts, whether they be liberal, conservative, or whatever.

The thing is, I will defend my positions, and not necessarily as politely as one might wish. I honestly don't know people's preferred level of politeness, so I often gauge my response by the sound of what the person wrote.

Often people are accused of being 'vicious' on this blog-- although, people will come in and basically call Bob or any of us idiots and expect us to sit and take it.

There's no anger or rage or hatred-- think of it as more of sparring. The tradition I come from is one of lively discussion and debate. And yes, we often offend one another, but are quick to forgive. We test each others' limits that way.

Glad to hear you know who the Lord is. There's much more to Christ Jesus (the Logos, the Everlasting Light, the King of Kings... etc) than just the guy who told us to love one another and love God.

My organ teacher said to me this: "Be careful about working for the Church-- you might just lose your religion."

12/22/2006 05:25:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

ROBERT A: Thanks for your thoughtful reply. I can certainly empathize with you about Churchianity...We typically say, "Churchianity pukes out the Remnant" and "Churchianity Christians always shoot their woundeds."

Sorry you had a bad experience with Them, many Christians have come from a similar spiritually abusive experience, but have chosen to transform the pain of the rejection into a launching point to growth which challenges them to Seek deeply & Knock more persistently (as one is motivated to search for water in a desert) until they finally find a deep tangible organic experiential relationship w/Christ & hopefully connect with The (True) Body instead of being codependent on others first and putting Christ a distant 2nd/3rd.

We are here to know Christ, yes? We call ourselves Christ-ians since we claim to follow him, not Buddha? Then let us do so in earnest.

So we must study who He is - the Triune aspects of the Godhead invite us to deeper knowledge & potential relationship & experience of God.

If you'd like to check out a bit of interesting reading, there are many good books by Herbert Lockyear on the Names of God. Also: "The Names of Jesus" AB Simpson. These books take excerpts from Scripture & delineate each Theme/Topic so we can learn the various Aspects of God, Jesus and HolySpirit, to learn their Identities as they are Beings, and not things, so we can relate with Them based on Truth not lies and projections.

We need to also learn not to put so much "faith" in what WE feel and think, and instead learn to open to what Scripture study has to teach us and show us.

I will never in a million years understand people that have a problem with accepting/rejecting the idea of Absolute Truth/God. But thats just me.

I accept it, I study it, I receive it, I learn it, I grow & share in that security and knowledge of Absolute Truth that gives true Christians a rock-solid base from which to proceed forward to relate from the internal to the external world.

Hope these refs to Books help give you a starting place. They will at least round out your narrow view and fill in the spectrum colors between Wimpy Jesus and Hardass Jesus. Knowing Him better is our goal, yes?

Zondervan has a great series of books that are chockful of "Charts of..." various themes, such as Theologies, Heresies, Church History, Aspects of God, etc.

Theology is about the study of God, and you can usually learn more taking a few classes or reading a few Theological 101 Textbooks than you can attending a year stadium circus-church.

I encourage you to continue on your journey, to develop spiritual depth, and commit yourself to studying little by little all you can to know God, Jesus and the Holy Spirit in their fullness of Identity, Personality, and Functions, how they each relate with us, how you relate with them.

There is an incredible stability I get from the combination of my knowledge of Them and my relationship w/Them, and I am grateful for it, and wish you well in your spiritual development & journey. Keep reading here on Bob-s blog there is much to ponder & chew and consider - perspective and developing skill in right judgment does take time, but its an immensely worthy goal to grow into gaining. Perseverance & paring down, as we say.

Blessings to You!
- PsychoPrincess -

12/22/2006 07:48:00 PM  
Anonymous Robert A. said...

Thank you all. I need to take a break and digest all this. As I might have already said, I'm better off spectating than participating just now. I want to say though that the tone of these final posts is great, and surprising, given the reception I thought I would receive.

It's amazing the way new thought flows when a defensive posture is dropped. I am sure this follows a universal metaphysical principle, and that this principle is in use by all great spiritual teachers. Hence the reason for great ones expressing compassion rather than ridicule when confronted with differing thought.

12/23/2006 07:27:00 AM  
Anonymous PsychoPrincess said...

ROBERT A: Thanks for the compliments! Usually if a person takes care to present self as non-arrogant, more as a seeker of answers to questions, then we do address them kindly & supportively. But see the other side with compassion also: We get alot of people not only in here (on the blog) but in our daily lives who evidence arrogance - which they think smacks up against ours (their arrogance does, but our is not arrogance, its more like assertiveness.)

LOL Buford Pusser! No, um, Jesus is not quite like that, but He is Assertive, Bold (The Lion of Judah, King, Justice, etc.) AND He is also Compassionate Merciful Healer/Shepherd, and lots of things in between. Just wanted to clarify hes not polar opposites and either/or switches between them - Hes the ultimate Integralist, actually.

Hope that helps and best wishes to you in your studies. You are welcome to come back here anytime & participate. One other reader decided to go into Pupa / Cocoon stage and cogitate on the blog here w/less interaction, just so you are assured thats an option too.

Now that we know you a little better and where you are coming from it helps us see you more clearly & respond better also. Sometimes it can be rough going at first - we are in a Spiritual War, yes? Sometimes potential friends are not immediately recognized. But with Gods help we make it through. Just know you are welcome here anytime you're ready to come back.

- PsychoPrincess -

12/24/2006 03:30:00 AM  
Blogger A. Truman North said...

As true today as it was when you wrote it.

Wait, that's not considered "history" anymore?

Hard to imagine anyone who is currently being indocterinated into Leftist ideology reaching back far enough to see how wrong their tutors are.

Linked.
A. Truman North
http://condig.blogspot.com
conservativedigest-at-yahoo-dot-com

1/03/2007 11:45:00 AM  
Blogger 梦中林 said...

When the Wow Gold wolf finally found the Buy Wow Goldhole in the chimney he crawled wow gold cheap down and KERSPLASH right into that kettle of water and that was cheapest wow gold the end of his troubles with the big bad wolf.
The next day the cheap wow gold little pig invited his mother over . She said "You see it is just as mygamegoldI told you. The way to get along in the world is to do world of warcraft gold things as well as you can." Fortunately for that little pig, he buy cheap wow gold learned that lesson. And he just k4gold lived happily ever after!

3/11/2009 06:55:00 AM  

Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home