The Time has Come to Speak of Many Things; of Fools and Tips and WikiLeaks; of Cabbageheads and the Fall of kings

6a00d8341c60bf53ef0120a5f53d7c970c-500wi

The Time has Come to Speak of Many Things; Of Fools, and Tips, and WikiLeaks;Of CabbageHeads, and The Fall of Kings

I just saw on al-Jazeera that WikiLeaks has released information showing that the Lebanese government had actually dared to attempt to give sensible advice to Israel on how to best attack Hezbollah; which happens to seek to bring down the Lebanese government.

Al-Jazeera has used this information the way every opposition group would, they make as much religious discord and political hay as possible. This is occurring over and over, all over the world. Russian leaks have revealed political gold for those who have fought the Russian combination  of paranoia and aggression for decades; including those who have used the rightness of that fight to exercise their own paranoia and aggression, like McCarthy. 

In the US haters of every “regime” since Washington are either slavering over data released or fervently praying that the next batch will give them what they need to finally bring about the collapse necessary to their promised utopia (Utopia is a word derived from the title of a book about the “perfect” society/city; when it was chosen to be the name for such a city the word meant nowhere.).

The thought occurred to me today that the PC fanatics have so focused the publics mind on an imaginary “ideal” society’s reactions to any present reality that they have rendered any sensible action in the present insensible to that same public mind. If your goal is to support the nation of Lebanon, as opposed to the Muslim or Christians within that nation, then it certainly makes sense, in attacking Hezbollah, not to attack Christian areas that are at the top of the ethnic/religious cleansing “To Do List” Hezbollah keeps for when they triumph.  But in today’s world that sort of thing is seen as nothing but an expression of religious favoritism, for Christians no less, who suffer violent persecutions across the face of the Muslim world today, to be made into political coinage by those who are the epitome of religious bigotry – Hezbollah.

One of the few nice things about president Obama is that he is such a narcissist that he sometimes let slip his mask when preening in front of the cameras more than most politicians accustomed to the national and international stage. On one such occasion he spoke of his support (faint, fading, and only present when it was/is expedient) in the face of sporadic rocket attacks by “rogue” and “independent” rebels who happened to enjoy the full support and resources of the PA, Hamas and/or Iran.  He said that if someone in Canada started lobbing rockets at a town his daughters lived in he would, as a citizen, vote to flatten the area if it did not give up the attackers willingly and cheerfully. Most of the “liberal” world then proceeded to castigate him for that most sensible reaction.

The “elite” exist on all sides however. On the “conservative” side a religiously based form of PC has sought dominance for decades; attempting to “bring back” a better time that never really existed, every era being like this and every other time, comprised of reality not idealizations, and enforce a “natural law” that can only be found in a modern, conservative Protestant interpretation of the Bible. Tolerance for the “deviant sin” of homosexuality, or revealing that the once held stupid, youthful ideas not from the fringe of the conservative Christian paradigm (as opposed to stupid ideas that do, like racism or gay bashing and whatnot). To do so is to be declared outcast from political power or, at the very least legitimacy.

To defeat this inhumanly incorrect trend the people must be willing to see the tribalistic partisanship on all sides who seek to seize the political stage from large segments of society for their own personal/political ends; mistake me not, I mean all parties, everywhere. No political group is immune to this, as Larry Niven declared in one of his Niven’s Laws “there is no case so noble it does not attract fudgeheads.”

Yes, I mean you, and you too over in the corner. The solution to social issues is never to simply suppress any dissent; “reasoning” that does not have its foundation in reality is always going to trend toward the unreasonable, regardless of the righteousness, or self-righteousness, of its proponents. Most of the information released by WikiLeaks is not really juicy at all, it is just the details of a real government dealing with reality. The few bits that are “hot” are about individual actions or things not part of the publicly known policy of the given nation.

WikiLeaks is not a noble rebel, it is an insidious tool for enforcing the PC fascism worldwide with the fall of governments the price of deviance without usefulness. It is dangerous in another way that I have yet to see discussed; who can possibly tell if they are adding or deleting things when virtually no government is going to release the original documents to the public?  WikiLeaks need only keep close to the truth in the beginning; as soon as the public feels that there is credibility they can slowly adulterate their “leaks” with tiny changes that spin them where they want them to go. Given enough time and acceptance WikiLeaks could begin a true campaign of Pravda, “truth” that is only true if it supports the political paradigm of the WikiLeaks controllers. It is not hard to imagine how easy it would be to scour reams of documents, then change only a word or six in several pages but change the political implications of the document entirely; you then release this “leak” and site back while the government and opposition do your work for you. Easy, if you are Dr. Evil, not so easy when you care about the ideals this country was founded upon.

Heretical Thoughts Of The Day

cRUSADE

What is money? To most people money is wealth, it is what they think of as the end result of time, labor and ingenuity.  In the view of conventional wisdom money is to the economy as steel ingots are to a steel mill; the result and end purpose of the institution.

Conventional wisdom, the public and virtually every "economist" making their livings by distorting reality to conform to political visions are wrong. Money is none of that. Wealth consists of the things we produce that last and can be traded amongst ourselves or that enhance the ease of trading or the quality of life for all (ie. roads, bridges, parks, hospitals, schools, etc.).

While services are a vital component of a truly modern economy (see CIA World Factbook for percentages of GDP invested in services in 1st, 2nd and third world countries.), it is only those parts of the economy that *create* lasting goods or universal public services (ie. not ones used only by certain segments of the population and no others.) that truly add to the wealth of a nation.

Yes Virginia, money is not wealth, wealth is only some of what money can buy.  But then what is money?  Money is the set of tokens we use to keep track of who owes what to who. It is also can be seen as a token set for power, but that is secondary and dependent in the long term on how much real wealth is behind a particular collection of tokens.  Money is not wealth, wealth is wealth and forgetting the difference is the only real reason the economists cannot ever seem to agree on what works and what does not.

How does a country raise its wealth without major inflation? Not by simply running the printing presses; wealth must be created to back those new tokens or the "value" of the all of the tokens diminishes.  What needs to be done is to simply decide what things we want to raise our national wealth with, then do it.

I hear gasps of outrage from all sides already, but I stand behind my statement.  If you build it, they will come. 

The bottom line is that if you want to help the economy you need to spend money on things that are still there next year, and the year after that, and the decade after that.  The more spent on paper shuffling zeros and administrative overhead, or services that vanish as soon as they are provided the less wealth and the more inflation we will have.

It is that simple people, go get on your pols about it!

Dana Cloud “rebuts” David Horowitz: Her Plea? “Guilty but Protected”

guy dewhitney on dana cloud david horowitz and academic freedom in a Marxist classroom

As any would know from my post “David Come Home” I am not an uncritical fan of David Horowitz. However, my quibbles are more in the form of criticism for occasional partisanship than criticism for his main ideas.

This is especially true when talking about the campaign against indoctrination on campus. I have been and will remain dedicated to free speech in its diverse forms but I will not go on record supporting any one’s political opinion being fostered on students as “course content“. A paid professor is not getting their check to stand before a captive audience and dangle grades as incentive for political conversion to the cause of the professor’s choice. Is it not obvious that a GOOD class on feminism would be about the history of the movement, its triumphs its mistakes and its possible futures? Instead we get classes that essentially teach the scientifically unsupportable political fantasy of “gender theory” as fact; something the departments of psychology and neurobiology would be stunned to hear.

But I digress, my purpose today is to dissect a rabid attack on Mr. Horowitz’s campaign by one of the very rabid radicals he is worried about. Let us extend a warm Heretical Welcome to Dana Cloud.

Dana holds a PhD. in rhetorical studies. That is about what it sounds like, She is trained to persuade and teach others to persuade by words. Or is it? when we look beyond Ms. Clouds department profile to the faculty bio we find her masters and PhD. are in communication studies. I have to say she sure learned her lessons well. “Rhetorical Studies” sounds SO much more authoritative and “persuasive” than plain old Communication Studies doesn’t it?

Since then she has been at U of Texas teaching such diverse subjects as social movements, gender and communication, rhetorical criticism, public sphere theory, Marxist theory, and feminist theory. I think we can already see why she is in Mr. Horowitz’s sites, but wait, there is much, much, more!

From her department blurb: “Professor Cloud’s research interests lie in the areas of rhetoric and social movements, critique of representations of race and gender in the mass media, and the defense of historical materialist theory and method in communication studies.” To translate her rather obviously intentional opacity – She teaches the DEFENSE of Marxism, as well as Marxism and various Marxist based “feminist” and race based classes. I think it is now totally obvious both why Mr. Horowitz has her on his lists and why she feels it her native right to assault him “by any means necessary” with her words.

I do believe it would have done Ms. cloud good to have taken a few courses in logic and history however. As we are about to see her sense of reality seems a bit strained to even the generous minded.)

Dangerous and Loud
Getting Radical With Dana Cloud

Right off the top Ms. Clouds stands up and declares herself in no uncertain terms for her, assumed to be, sympathetic audience. She says she is dangerous and loud. Since this is a written piece and we will assume Ms. Cloud is not psychotic I guess this means she feels her words will strike hard on our inner ears and minds. Well we all have our hopes.

But what about the rest? Just what IS a “radical“? According to Merriam-Webster the definition that matches her is

“3 a : marked by a considerable departure from the usual or traditional : EXTREME

b : tending or disposed to make EXTREME changes in existing views, habits, conditions, or institutions

c : of, relating to, or constituting a political group associated with views, practices, and policies of EXTREME change

d : advocating EXTREME MEASURES to retain or restore a political state of affairs “

OKAAAAY, I think we get where she is coming from. And this woman TEACHES her radical Marxist based “classes” under the guise of….Communication Studies???? Radical Marxism and radical feminism are subjects for communication studies? Mind you, these are not even courses analysing those ideologies; these classes TEACH them!
And, we haven’t even gotten to the meat of her “argument” yet. Take a deep breath, this may hurt a bit. Take it away Doctor Cloud!)

Coming to a Campus Near You: David Horowitz, Attack Dog for the Right March 6, 2007
DAVID HOROWITZ is a self-appointed general of the right-wing thought police.

Okay, at the bell she comes out with an immediate flurry of roundhouse punches designed to make Mr. Horowitz scurry for cover. First, the warning about the threat to YOU; then the smooth series of demonizing labels.

In reference to my above comment about Logic 101 and it’s absence in Doctor Clouds background we should wonder just how Mr. Horowitz not only appointed himself a “Right Wing” general but convinced his unwilling new sponsors to pay him 300,000 bucks a year!  The “thought police” bit we will get to later.)

In 2006, he published The Professors: The 101 Most Dangerous Academics in America. In it, he named me and 100 other professors as threats to national security akin to terrorists.

Only if you consider the ability of our students to get through college without having to pass a political indoctrination by people who’s ideology has totally failed in the crucible of the REAL world as applying to our society’s future security; in that case, YEAH LADY, you are an enemy of the state.

Continue reading