"We as Americans are meant to revel in our ability to dominate."
Reveling in our ability to dominate is not unique to Americans. The British did when they were on top. The French, the Germans, the Romans, the Greeks, the Egyptians - they all did it when they were on top. And you can bet, the Chinese will also do it when they get on top - which probably won't be long, now.
Unfortunately its the crazy, cray, cray, way Homo Sapiens are hardwired for War and the instincts to commit violence we dominate the planet w/ our large mammalian brains....
It's a simple thing. Declare someone or some country the enemy and hopefully less than human. Then you can do whatever you want to them. The Germans did it to the Jews in the mid 20th century, declaring them less than human and comparing them to vermin. Modern politicians pick out some foreign leader and try to teach the population to hate them. I recently received an email from one of my senators explaining his yes vote on the Lindsey Graham sanctions bill. He dismissed Putin as a "murderous KGB thug". So I guess that means the president can screw up world trade as much as he wants to. /s
I'm thinking that's why peace movements aren't as successful as war movements. They don't demonize quite so easily. Call it courtesy.
I ordered a new book: The President's Echo System: How Foreign Policy Is Sold to Americans
What I cannot really understand, although I try to, and what arouses my slow-burning rage, is the blind eyes to war and militarism of environmentalists, from famous Bill McKibben to eco-savvy guy or gal on the street. Check out any large or medium environmental or (now) climate organization. To read their websites and printed materials, you'd think there was no such thing as war! Or the US, or any other, military for that matter, with few exceptions. Rarely is a non-US environmental writer, organizer, martyr quoted, named, cited, admired. Not only are these well-funded organizations, legacy or new, NOT running campaigns to end US wars and support for Gaza Genocide, they don't even mention these horrific realities which exacerbate CO2 emissions and pollution! Did environmentalists explode in the hundreds of thousands marching and yelling in the street, years ago, when over 10,000 Libyans drowned in a single catastrophic flood when a large dam burst, due to extreme weather and rainfall caused by global heating? Are they (we) storming federal buildings demanding immediate responses now that 25,000+ Europeans have died from the killer heat this summer? And since the answer is NO, don't we all need to ask why the hell not? What are they (we) DOING? At least CODEPINK is trying to awaken the decision-makers in these orgs, one by one: https://www.codepink.org/tncinvite
Is it self-contradictory to love violent movies like "Dirty Harry," but still decry violence in society?
I admit to finding it satisfying to see rapists, killers, torturers, and animal abusers "get theirs," in the movies. But then, the way it works there is that they've proved themselves to be bad guys. Hmmm....
It's a kind of paradox. All good stories require tension and "drama" - antagonists and protagonists, some kind of conflict for the story to have any kind of interest to it - otherwise it ends up being boring. And what is the ultimate tension/conflict? Well - when all is at stake - life and death situations, lead to the most riveting kind of stories. War stories are particularly good at presenting the ultimate conflict/drama, although other themes can also be present in a war story: human sacrifice, virtue - human ingenuity to outsmart your opponent - or human endurance in the face of unimaginable hardships.
There is much one could write about our innate propensity to enjoy drama and conflict. However, it can also end up being very self-destructive to oneself if not to humanity if we don't learn how to manage the psychology involved. William James suggested, for example, that the desire could be sublimated by having war games that allow humans to play out their fantasies - but it would only be in bloodless games, not actual reality. I think I agree with James' view here - I think suppression of the enjoyment of conflict is impossible, but an avenue of expression that doesn't draw real blood might provide a psychological safety valve. And also allow people to come to learn how destructive and counter-productive real wars can be.
Most people who have studied war or actually participated in one, will likely tell you it's probably the last human activity one would want to carry out in real life. Although it appears these days our corrupt world leaders and politicians have war as their first choice of action. I don't know, what do you (and others) think about this?
Sports can be an outlet for competition, drama, conflict. Bloodless games.
And maybe there's a way to make cooperation "sexier" and more compelling. It seems every show needs a winner and a whole lot of losers. Why not more winners through cooperative effort and teamwork?
Unfortunately, the modern concept of power seems to embrace a zero-sum structure. Cooperation means sharing power, and our current society doesn't seem to be set up that way. It stands to reason that cooperation and teamwork bring better results for all, as you say, but the people in charge clearly aren't interested in that outcome.
Hello Bill Astore... To get a Glimpse of the Ukrainian Front, watch Episode-1, Season-3, of 'Lioness' by Taylor Sheridan.... To put yourself there is Frightening... Taylor Sheridan does Stellar Research... Modern War Has No 'Glory'...
Barry McGuires "Eve of Destruction" came out in 1964, and now its even more relevant than ever! Nothing has changed. I remember listening to it in 45 on our old Record Player back in the Sixties. How many more Generations will have to relate to this song?
That song was written by one P.F. Sloan (or something like that name-wise). Once I became politically aware, I despised that line "Think of all the hate there is in Red China." Uh-huh. Four black schoolchildren had been blown up in a church the year before (and a POTUS assassinated) and Civil Rights workers would be murdered in Mississippi in 1964. But we were asked to "think of all the hate there is in Red China." That song is a bunch of BS!! Today's US politics are no less revoltingly based on HATE than the scene in Nazi Germany. Well, from the GOP side that is. The Dems? Spineless and clueless. "Joy," Kamala Harris??
I think the meaning on China Greg was Chairmans Mao and his Cultural Revolution of which 1.5 million human beings lost their lives...! Now the West is falling.
I'd attribute it more to general anti-communist propaganda. China's population was already far greater than that of the Soviet Union. Now said to have been surpassed by India for largest population. India is shaping up as a very interesting story. They have announced missions to the Moon, their own Earth orbiting space station, and eventually a lunar base! This should not be dismissed as wishful thinking! India harbors many extremely intelligent people. Probably will soon surpass the US in scientific activity, given the attitude of "our" current administration.
These are still noble ideas General Eisenhower expounded on in his Cross of Iron speech to the American Society of Newspaper Editors delivered 16 April 1953.
First: No people on earth can be held, as a people, to be an enemy -- for all humanity shares the common hunger for peace and fellowship and justice.
Second: No nation's security and well-being can be lastingly achieved in isolation -- but only in effective cooperation with fellow nations.
Third: Every nation's right to a form of government and an economic system of its own choosing is inalienable.
Fourth: Any nation's attempt to dictate to other nations their form of government is indefensible.
And Fifth: A nation's hope of lasting peace cannot be firmly based upon any race in armaments -- but rather upon just relations and honest understanding with all other nations.
In the light of these principles, the citizens of the United States defined the way they proposed to follow, through the aftermath of -- of war, toward true peace. This way was faithful to the spirit that inspired the United Nations -- to prohibit strife, to relieve tensions, to banish fears. This way was to control and to reduce armaments. This way was to allow all nations to devote their energies and resources to the great and good tasks of healing the war's wounds, of clothing and feeding and housing the needy, of perfecting a just political life, of enjoying the fruits of their own toil.
Unfortunately, President Eisenhower betrayed his Third and Fourth Principles just months later, complicit in the 1953 CIA/British MI6 Regime Change of the Democratically elected Iranian government for oil, like the US just did in Venezuela.
Any movie starring that dude (I think you misspelled his surname, Bill) is pretty well guaranteed to be in the category I have deemed BDL: Big, Dumb and Loud. Now, let's talk about a movie with "a wee bit of violence." I think "Fight Club" is absolutely brilliant, a wickedly sly attack on our materialistic capitalist society. I consider it one of the best movies of the past 30 years. And BTW "A Clockwork Orange" will turn 55 later this year. More brilliant social commentary.
Hello Bill Astore... Is it Coincidence that the 'Forever Wars' were conducted by GWB, Obama, and DJT?... All three avoided the Draft.... Eisenhower, and JFK avoided the Forever Wars because they saw War first-hand...
Probably so. Although Tom Cotton and Pete Hegseth were both in the military and both are as militaristic as they come. Presumably being in the military gives one license to be a warmonger. /s
Hello Alex... How Close, and for How Long were they in the Forward-Edge-Of-The-Battle-Area?... How many Letters did they have write to to Families of the Fallen?....
Statistically, only 10%-15% of military personnel experience actual combat. From Hegseth's limited active duty time as a National Guard/Army Reserve infantry officer, it appears that Hegseth was never in a combat position. His limited active duty deployments were in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba (presumably in the guard force), Iraq as an S9 (civil affairs officer) and Afghanistan as a counterinsurgency training officer (who lacked any experience in counterinsurgency operations). His bronze stars were for meritorious service (which means he completed his assignments without incident) and not for valor during combat.
Most of his 20 year military career was served as a week-end warrior.
Small correction: Hegseth served for about 12 years in the military. He didn't have a 20-year career. His assignments placed him overseas but not in direct combat (as you say).
Bill, the Title for my article to be published September 1 is, 'These People Draw Close to Me with Their Mouth, and Honour Me with Their Lips; But Their Heart Is Far from Me'
"We as Americans are meant to revel in our ability to dominate."
Reveling in our ability to dominate is not unique to Americans. The British did when they were on top. The French, the Germans, the Romans, the Greeks, the Egyptians - they all did it when they were on top. And you can bet, the Chinese will also do it when they get on top - which probably won't be long, now.
Unfortunately its the crazy, cray, cray, way Homo Sapiens are hardwired for War and the instincts to commit violence we dominate the planet w/ our large mammalian brains....
It's a simple thing. Declare someone or some country the enemy and hopefully less than human. Then you can do whatever you want to them. The Germans did it to the Jews in the mid 20th century, declaring them less than human and comparing them to vermin. Modern politicians pick out some foreign leader and try to teach the population to hate them. I recently received an email from one of my senators explaining his yes vote on the Lindsey Graham sanctions bill. He dismissed Putin as a "murderous KGB thug". So I guess that means the president can screw up world trade as much as he wants to. /s
I'm thinking that's why peace movements aren't as successful as war movements. They don't demonize quite so easily. Call it courtesy.
I ordered a new book: The President's Echo System: How Foreign Policy Is Sold to Americans
by Chad Levinson.
What I cannot really understand, although I try to, and what arouses my slow-burning rage, is the blind eyes to war and militarism of environmentalists, from famous Bill McKibben to eco-savvy guy or gal on the street. Check out any large or medium environmental or (now) climate organization. To read their websites and printed materials, you'd think there was no such thing as war! Or the US, or any other, military for that matter, with few exceptions. Rarely is a non-US environmental writer, organizer, martyr quoted, named, cited, admired. Not only are these well-funded organizations, legacy or new, NOT running campaigns to end US wars and support for Gaza Genocide, they don't even mention these horrific realities which exacerbate CO2 emissions and pollution! Did environmentalists explode in the hundreds of thousands marching and yelling in the street, years ago, when over 10,000 Libyans drowned in a single catastrophic flood when a large dam burst, due to extreme weather and rainfall caused by global heating? Are they (we) storming federal buildings demanding immediate responses now that 25,000+ Europeans have died from the killer heat this summer? And since the answer is NO, don't we all need to ask why the hell not? What are they (we) DOING? At least CODEPINK is trying to awaken the decision-makers in these orgs, one by one: https://www.codepink.org/tncinvite
War destroys the environment. Poisons and toxins everywhere. Unexploded ordnance and hidden mines. Blasted landscapes. So many dead animals.
And so many dead humans, some vaporized into the air that other humans breathe in. #Genocide is #ecocide.
Is it self-contradictory to love violent movies like "Dirty Harry," but still decry violence in society?
I admit to finding it satisfying to see rapists, killers, torturers, and animal abusers "get theirs," in the movies. But then, the way it works there is that they've proved themselves to be bad guys. Hmmm....
Harry Callahan "Nothing wrong with shooting as long as the right people get shot."lol
It's a kind of paradox. All good stories require tension and "drama" - antagonists and protagonists, some kind of conflict for the story to have any kind of interest to it - otherwise it ends up being boring. And what is the ultimate tension/conflict? Well - when all is at stake - life and death situations, lead to the most riveting kind of stories. War stories are particularly good at presenting the ultimate conflict/drama, although other themes can also be present in a war story: human sacrifice, virtue - human ingenuity to outsmart your opponent - or human endurance in the face of unimaginable hardships.
There is much one could write about our innate propensity to enjoy drama and conflict. However, it can also end up being very self-destructive to oneself if not to humanity if we don't learn how to manage the psychology involved. William James suggested, for example, that the desire could be sublimated by having war games that allow humans to play out their fantasies - but it would only be in bloodless games, not actual reality. I think I agree with James' view here - I think suppression of the enjoyment of conflict is impossible, but an avenue of expression that doesn't draw real blood might provide a psychological safety valve. And also allow people to come to learn how destructive and counter-productive real wars can be.
Most people who have studied war or actually participated in one, will likely tell you it's probably the last human activity one would want to carry out in real life. Although it appears these days our corrupt world leaders and politicians have war as their first choice of action. I don't know, what do you (and others) think about this?
War is the worst option. It breeds atrocity.
Sports can be an outlet for competition, drama, conflict. Bloodless games.
And maybe there's a way to make cooperation "sexier" and more compelling. It seems every show needs a winner and a whole lot of losers. Why not more winners through cooperative effort and teamwork?
Unfortunately, the modern concept of power seems to embrace a zero-sum structure. Cooperation means sharing power, and our current society doesn't seem to be set up that way. It stands to reason that cooperation and teamwork bring better results for all, as you say, but the people in charge clearly aren't interested in that outcome.
I agree with you about James' ideas.
Hello Bill Astore... To get a Glimpse of the Ukrainian Front, watch Episode-1, Season-3, of 'Lioness' by Taylor Sheridan.... To put yourself there is Frightening... Taylor Sheridan does Stellar Research... Modern War Has No 'Glory'...
There was never any "Glory" in any war. "Glory in war" is pure fiction.
Barry McGuires "Eve of Destruction" came out in 1964, and now its even more relevant than ever! Nothing has changed. I remember listening to it in 45 on our old Record Player back in the Sixties. How many more Generations will have to relate to this song?
That song was written by one P.F. Sloan (or something like that name-wise). Once I became politically aware, I despised that line "Think of all the hate there is in Red China." Uh-huh. Four black schoolchildren had been blown up in a church the year before (and a POTUS assassinated) and Civil Rights workers would be murdered in Mississippi in 1964. But we were asked to "think of all the hate there is in Red China." That song is a bunch of BS!! Today's US politics are no less revoltingly based on HATE than the scene in Nazi Germany. Well, from the GOP side that is. The Dems? Spineless and clueless. "Joy," Kamala Harris??
I think the meaning on China Greg was Chairmans Mao and his Cultural Revolution of which 1.5 million human beings lost their lives...! Now the West is falling.
I'd attribute it more to general anti-communist propaganda. China's population was already far greater than that of the Soviet Union. Now said to have been surpassed by India for largest population. India is shaping up as a very interesting story. They have announced missions to the Moon, their own Earth orbiting space station, and eventually a lunar base! This should not be dismissed as wishful thinking! India harbors many extremely intelligent people. Probably will soon surpass the US in scientific activity, given the attitude of "our" current administration.
These are still noble ideas General Eisenhower expounded on in his Cross of Iron speech to the American Society of Newspaper Editors delivered 16 April 1953.
First: No people on earth can be held, as a people, to be an enemy -- for all humanity shares the common hunger for peace and fellowship and justice.
Second: No nation's security and well-being can be lastingly achieved in isolation -- but only in effective cooperation with fellow nations.
Third: Every nation's right to a form of government and an economic system of its own choosing is inalienable.
Fourth: Any nation's attempt to dictate to other nations their form of government is indefensible.
And Fifth: A nation's hope of lasting peace cannot be firmly based upon any race in armaments -- but rather upon just relations and honest understanding with all other nations.
In the light of these principles, the citizens of the United States defined the way they proposed to follow, through the aftermath of -- of war, toward true peace. This way was faithful to the spirit that inspired the United Nations -- to prohibit strife, to relieve tensions, to banish fears. This way was to control and to reduce armaments. This way was to allow all nations to devote their energies and resources to the great and good tasks of healing the war's wounds, of clothing and feeding and housing the needy, of perfecting a just political life, of enjoying the fruits of their own toil.
Unfortunately, President Eisenhower betrayed his Third and Fourth Principles just months later, complicit in the 1953 CIA/British MI6 Regime Change of the Democratically elected Iranian government for oil, like the US just did in Venezuela.
Any movie starring that dude (I think you misspelled his surname, Bill) is pretty well guaranteed to be in the category I have deemed BDL: Big, Dumb and Loud. Now, let's talk about a movie with "a wee bit of violence." I think "Fight Club" is absolutely brilliant, a wickedly sly attack on our materialistic capitalist society. I consider it one of the best movies of the past 30 years. And BTW "A Clockwork Orange" will turn 55 later this year. More brilliant social commentary.
Hello Bill Astore... Is it Coincidence that the 'Forever Wars' were conducted by GWB, Obama, and DJT?... All three avoided the Draft.... Eisenhower, and JFK avoided the Forever Wars because they saw War first-hand...
Probably so. Although Tom Cotton and Pete Hegseth were both in the military and both are as militaristic as they come. Presumably being in the military gives one license to be a warmonger. /s
Hello Alex... How Close, and for How Long were they in the Forward-Edge-Of-The-Battle-Area?... How many Letters did they have write to to Families of the Fallen?....
Statistically, only 10%-15% of military personnel experience actual combat. From Hegseth's limited active duty time as a National Guard/Army Reserve infantry officer, it appears that Hegseth was never in a combat position. His limited active duty deployments were in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba (presumably in the guard force), Iraq as an S9 (civil affairs officer) and Afghanistan as a counterinsurgency training officer (who lacked any experience in counterinsurgency operations). His bronze stars were for meritorious service (which means he completed his assignments without incident) and not for valor during combat.
Most of his 20 year military career was served as a week-end warrior.
Small correction: Hegseth served for about 12 years in the military. He didn't have a 20-year career. His assignments placed him overseas but not in direct combat (as you say).
Most veterans I know (including myself) don't like war. For most of us, being in the military made us see what a total f'kg waste it is.
I'm guessing that's probably true.
I could not watch the entire Mutiny trailer because of the violence.
Agreed. Modern day gambling is legal everywhere. I wrote an article about it somewhere on my substack. Ugh. Sage words, as always, Bill.
Bill, the Title for my article to be published September 1 is, 'These People Draw Close to Me with Their Mouth, and Honour Me with Their Lips; But Their Heart Is Far from Me'