I like this essay, but I might make a few qualifications re the State of Israel.
Also, there is another issue here: How the United States is being perceived. Up until recently, the notion that the U.S. was an imperialistic, capitalistic behemoth was, primarily, a notion most popular among Marxists and third world radicals.
However, in the past week, the MASK OF OFFICIAL ILLUSION HAS BEEN RIPPED AWAY FROM AMERICA'S FACE.
First, Trump said that he was going into Venezuela for drugs. Now he has come right out and admitted that he's only after oil and wealth and will murder for oil money.
Trump has proven what the Far Left has said all along: Amerikkka is only after the money,
Thanks, David. Yes, I think you're absolutely right.
When Iranians burned American flags in 1979, we all thought they were loonies. But, whether anyone else is changing their mind on that, and how, I can't say, especially when computer filtering only sends me articles that fit with my world view (I expressly go and read people who disagree with me, so as to avoid slipping into confirmation bias). Let me give you an example.
I happen to be a believer in God and I have no view on whether others also believe. Whether I believe is a question for me. The reason I raise this does not have to do with God, however; the point is *why* I believe: I believe in God because I think it "stands to reason" that He exists. How, in what form, and what for, are up in the air.
When we allow the polemic and bias and bigotry to be stripped away from our world views, we sometimes have difficulty in determining what it is that "stands to reason": polemic gives us a reason, even though it doesn't in and of itself stand to reason. It didn't stand to reason that the Shah was deposed in 1979 (because our newsfeed told us so). Now, it stands to reason (if you're interested: "Resistance" by Alastair Crooke).
The difficulty I have now is to answer the following question truthfully:
Do I want the US to stay out of Greenland because I believe in Denmark's ancient claim to the island?
Or because I think Greenland should be independent?
Or should I want the US there because I think the US's security also means my own security?
And, on top of that, does preservation of the NATO alliance form a cogent reason for choosing one or the other of these options?
To be honest, I find answering these questions difficult, because of polemic; because the whole question is overshadowed by:
(a) the fact I can't stand Donald Trump's guts, and
(b) Venezuela.
I'm actually a bit frightened that one day people will universally say that I was totally wrong to hate Donald Trump's guts. And, moreover, that I'll be one of them.
I very much like your blog - you are far more outspoken than I am, but I believe in your passion. I don't use sneers (like the "kkk" thing), because I'm not so sure I'm right and I would ask those against whom I would sneer to have respect for my view, so I try not to mock them. We have similar views, you and I, different styles. :-)
I like this essay, but I might make a few qualifications re the State of Israel.
Also, there is another issue here: How the United States is being perceived. Up until recently, the notion that the U.S. was an imperialistic, capitalistic behemoth was, primarily, a notion most popular among Marxists and third world radicals.
However, in the past week, the MASK OF OFFICIAL ILLUSION HAS BEEN RIPPED AWAY FROM AMERICA'S FACE.
First, Trump said that he was going into Venezuela for drugs. Now he has come right out and admitted that he's only after oil and wealth and will murder for oil money.
Trump has proven what the Far Left has said all along: Amerikkka is only after the money,
Thanks, David. Yes, I think you're absolutely right.
When Iranians burned American flags in 1979, we all thought they were loonies. But, whether anyone else is changing their mind on that, and how, I can't say, especially when computer filtering only sends me articles that fit with my world view (I expressly go and read people who disagree with me, so as to avoid slipping into confirmation bias). Let me give you an example.
I happen to be a believer in God and I have no view on whether others also believe. Whether I believe is a question for me. The reason I raise this does not have to do with God, however; the point is *why* I believe: I believe in God because I think it "stands to reason" that He exists. How, in what form, and what for, are up in the air.
When we allow the polemic and bias and bigotry to be stripped away from our world views, we sometimes have difficulty in determining what it is that "stands to reason": polemic gives us a reason, even though it doesn't in and of itself stand to reason. It didn't stand to reason that the Shah was deposed in 1979 (because our newsfeed told us so). Now, it stands to reason (if you're interested: "Resistance" by Alastair Crooke).
The difficulty I have now is to answer the following question truthfully:
Do I want the US to stay out of Greenland because I believe in Denmark's ancient claim to the island?
Or because I think Greenland should be independent?
Or should I want the US there because I think the US's security also means my own security?
And, on top of that, does preservation of the NATO alliance form a cogent reason for choosing one or the other of these options?
To be honest, I find answering these questions difficult, because of polemic; because the whole question is overshadowed by:
(a) the fact I can't stand Donald Trump's guts, and
(b) Venezuela.
I'm actually a bit frightened that one day people will universally say that I was totally wrong to hate Donald Trump's guts. And, moreover, that I'll be one of them.
I very much like your blog - you are far more outspoken than I am, but I believe in your passion. I don't use sneers (like the "kkk" thing), because I'm not so sure I'm right and I would ask those against whom I would sneer to have respect for my view, so I try not to mock them. We have similar views, you and I, different styles. :-)