You are currently browsing the monthly archive for September 2011.
The problem with making a reasonable argument is that it takes time and patience to construct properly. Nonstampcollector makes a great video showing exactly how unonbjective the christian god actually is. Guaranteed to make the religious cringe as they face contradiction after contradiction, and precisely why the video appears on this blog.
One of the problems with christianity (and other made up bullshite) is that if given the time to actually think about what believing in it actually entails, you can easily end up among the growing ranks of the unwashed atheist hoard. The problem is squaring with what you been told with what actually is. If you closely read the bible you will see how morally repugnant it actually is, and realize that ethical claims cannot be based on this mouldering blood soaked text.
Meridian Frost’s work was brought to my attention by my fellow co-blogger Mystro. Frost analyses then dissects what it takes for a good christian to get into heaven. You would think that altruistic behaviour would be a prime requisite. You would be wrong, it requires grovelling and fealty to the sky-daddy before you are even *considered* for eternal bliss. Frost lays it all out and precisely details how fetid and unbelievable the whole concept is. Enjoy his incisive commentary.
The stories woven by official narratives often have little to with the reality of the situation. Lewis Lapham, editorially in Harper’s Magazine, was bold enough to contradict the official version of events. He lost subscribers, was labelled “unamerican” and worse, for his views. Listen to what he has to say as we near the approved mourning event.
I apologize for switching orchestras, but the original had parts missing so we had to go to this edition of the symphony.
Musical highlights courtesy of the Naxos website.
| 0. | The very opening chords unmistakably herald the arrival of something special. 00:01:06 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 56. | Second movement (complete) 00:12:00 |
The objectivist camp suffers another blow as parodied by this fine article by John Atcheson. Reprinted here for because a good objectivist smackdown is always welcome at DWR. Thanks to Ben Hoffman for bringing this article to my attention.
Atlas Mugged: The Ayn Rand Six Step
Imagine your landlord coming to you one day and saying, “It’s everyone for himself. We’re not going to supply heat or water or electricity any longer, and we’re not going to conduct repairs.”
Of course, you and the rest of the tenants wouldn’t stand for such a thing . You’d kick him out if you could and move out if you couldn’t.
But suppose, over the years, he cuts the part of the portion of your rent that goes to utilities and repair work. Year after year, he’d stop by and announce his cuts with great fanfare, telling you how much money you’ll save.
On each visit, as he handed out the meager savings, he’d rail about how the utilities were incompetent, and filled with lazy workers, and that repair and maintenance work was a rip-off perpetrated by equally lazy laborers.
“We’re gonna show them,” he’d say, “The market will take care of these bozos.”
Meanwhile, year after year, you pay a little less. Things might get a little ragged. The maintenance man might not show up every day; the fire alarms might stop working; the elevators get stuck more, there’s an occasional power outage, water’s a bit murky … but there’s those savings.
Unbeknownst to you, most of the money the landlord saves is going to upgrade the top floor where he and his cronies live, bringing in their own dependable power and clean water. But you don’t investigate much because … there’s those savings.
Every time you passed him in the hall, he’d give you his spiel. “Those repair guys are thieves,” he’d tell you, again and again. “And you might as well burn money as give it to the utilities,” he’d say with a sage nod of his head. “Just wait ‘til those market forces hit, that’ll show them.” But he’d begin to add a new verse to his rant. “And hey. What about those gays in 3G? Or the Mexicans in 2D? Disgrace how they double up like that …”
Then finally, one year, he announces he can no longer afford to supply heat, electricity or water, and he can’t be repairing anything that breaks any longer. “Just not enough money – besides, look what’s happening around here … throwing more money at those lazy good-for-nothings is no solution.”
Now imagine complaining to him about the frozen pipes, or your child’s pneumonia and him responding with: “Hey. It’s all about the market – if you want it, figure out a way to get it – the market will provide if you’re diligent. Look at the top floor. Besides, it’s all the fault of those Mexicans. Or those gays … or …”
Would you believe that crap? Would you put up with it?
Of course you wouldn’t.
Yet that is precisely the game the Republicans have been playing for years. Call it the Ayan Rand six step. Step one: discredit government. Step two, starve it. Step three, when the underfunded government can’t perform, stand back and say “I told you so.” Step four, create the myth of the individual uber-alles – the Marlboro man on steroids; Step five, if anyone gets wise, find a scapegoat and blame it on them – gays, immigrants, government workers; government working gay immigrants. Step six, when things get bad, divide and conquer – “if it wasn’t’ for them…
So now we are waiting for the magic market to deliver us from a crisis caused by the unconstrained market; we are loath to give the government a penny even though no one else is going to do the things it used to do and do well – the things that created the conditions for a broadly shared prosperity and an open, fair, and transparent market. Now, we are on the verge of shivering in the dark, as we point fingers to any of the various scapegoats the Republicans have created.
Now, their plutocratic bosses have free reign, and they’re gutting the building as we fight among ourselves.
The solution to bad government is good government, not no government.
The solution to envy and jealousy at public sector employees’ pension and benefits is not to strip theirs, but to get ours back.
Our strength comes not from how the strongest or luckiest among us exploit the rest, but from how we come together as a country to do that which we must do together. Indeed, we are great in proportion to how we treat the least fortunate among us, not the most.
The reason it feels like the United States is collapsing around our collective ankles is because it is – if we relinquish all responsibility to “the market” it will strip the walls, tear out the pipes and wires and raise the roof, selling our present and future to make a quick buck. That’s what markets are supposed to do.
And if we buy into some uber-individualist fairy tale about survival of the fittest, we’ll all be handing over a bigger share of our rapidly diminishing paychecks to the CEOs and CFOs of Goldman Sachs or Exxon and we’ll be SOL, as our biggest export will continue to be high wage jobs to China, India, Germany and other countries that haven’t bought into the Ayn Rand fantasy – or nightmare.
That’s why we need government. Because our freedom and welfare are indeed in danger – but not from government; rather from those who point fingers at government in hopes that you won’t notice they’re robbing you blind, in the name of a mutant form of free-market economics that’s really only existed on the pages of a second rate polemic masquerading as a novel.
Early primate hunters nearly initiated their own extinction by using the advanced technology of the time to stress their environment and hunt at unsustainable levels. At one time, our future rested on less than 20,000 individuals world wide. Luckily we did not die off completely and came to flourish and expand across the globe.
Despite the lessons of the past we continue to prioritize short term thinking over long term planning. Time after time our populations smash up against the carrying capacities of the environment. The wreckage of past societies lay quietly in the shallows of time as grim reminders of the poor choices societies have made and sadly, continue to make.
Our short shortsightedness continues to threaten our hopes for the future, as we clog the space around the earth with debris from our space programs.
“There are 22,000 objects in orbit that are big enough for officials on the ground to track and countless more smaller ones that could do damage to human-carrying spaceships and valuable satellites. The International Space Station has to move out of the way of debris from time to time.”
Watching the space shuttle or the International space station glide through space looks serene. A gossamer constellation hung in space. Yet in reality the ISS is travelling at roughly 27724 km per hour around the globe. Imagine the impact and damage when something strikes the station going over 20,000 km/h. Yet, we are putting more garbage into orbit through our actions.
“We’ve lost control of the environment,” said retired NASA senior scientist Donald Kessler, who headed the National Academy of Sciences report.
Since the space age began 54 years ago, civilization has littered the area just above Earth’s atmosphere with leftover boosters and other parts that come off during launches, as well as old satellites. When scientists noticed that this could be a problem, they came up with agreements to limit new space junk and those plans had been working.”
The warnings have already been issued. As usual, we are not listening.
Those agreements are intended to make sure what is sent into orbit eventually falls back to Earth and burns up.
“But two events in the past four years — a 2007 Chinese anti-satellite weapon test and a 2009 crash-in-orbit of two satellites — put so much new junk in space that everything changed, the report said. The widely criticized Chinese test used a missile to smash an aging weather satellite into 150,000 pieces of debris larger than one-centimetre and 3,118 pieces can be tracked by radar on the ground, the report said.
“Those two single events doubled the amount of fragments in Earth orbit and completely wiped out what we had done in the last 25 years,” Kessler said.
All that junk that means something has to be done, “which means you have to look at cleaning space,” said Kessler.”
Yes, so rather than attempting to minimize the hazards of space travel we are upping the ante with more projectiles circling the earth waiting to shred whatever happens to be in their path. Of course we look to technology to save us once again –
“The study only briefly mentions the cleanup possibility, raising technical, legal and diplomatic hurdles. But it refers to a report earlier this year by a Defence Department science think-tank that outlines all sorts of unusual techniques. The report by the Defence Advanced Research Projects Agency is called “Catcher’s Mitt” and it mentions harpoons, nets, tethers, magnets and even a giant dish or umbrella-shaped device that would sweep up tiny pieces of debris.
While the new report does not recommend using the technology, Kessler said it is needed. He likes one company’s idea of a satellite that is armed with nets that could be sprung on wayward junk. Attached to the net is an electromagnetic tether that could either pull the junk down to a point where it would burn up harmlessly or boost it to safer orbit.”
If that doesn’t work, we may deny ourselves the possibility of ever leaving our planet. Of course, that is just pessimistic long term thinking…







Your opinions…