WHAT ROUGH BEAST? America sits of the edge

blatham wrote:

perc

Well, my time teaching constitutes a very very small fraction of my time on the other side of that equation.

Blatham

This response is to something I had just written which Craven says was "insightful",and serves as a good example of what Craven was talking about. You absolutely refuse to acknowledge that my response had any substance or relevance. How can you expect anything but like replies to you.

0 Replies

Two quibbles perc,

First of all "vile" is subjective, if you want to make a comparative point about two countries you would do well to avoid subjective qualifiers. I'd say the same to people trying to make the case that America is evil.

The "vile" and "evil" are personal judgements that color the objective comparison.

You might disagree vehemently with the criticism Canadians level, but if the dicussion is that it is vile they can simply state that America is evil and you are deadlocked in counterproductive adjectives.

"Vile" is a hard enough concept to apply to a person, mcuh less a country.

Anywho, that's a mere quibble. The real qualm I want to address is that I do not think blatham never acknowledges the other side. My point to blatham was better phrased by saying I think his dissapointment with the discussions here are inexorably related to group dynamics. Not that he always wants to teach, that's something most could be characterized as being. But rather that he has a particular way he'd like the discussions to unfold, and that the nature of the group makes that difficult, and that their acyions could complicate their desires.

In short, almost everyone wants a whipping boy in these debates. But when one side outnumbers the other what they end up asking for is for someone to be everyone's whipping boy.

The very nature of the situation makes for less chances at satistafction. But since opposing political ideology is off putting to most they end up driving each other away, when they both really want to talk to each other (if only to try to dress each other up as whipping boys).

You want blatham to acknowledge you. That is what I mean, you want him to subject himself to your point or at least cede something.

My point was not that he never cedes, but that when one side outnumbers the other the other side ends up ceding (being teh whipping but) much more often on an individual level OR they flame, avoid or otherwise do not satisfy.

It's more of a commentary on the nature of these discussions than a commentary on blatham.

Unless you want an amen-club you will need dissenters. And a problem witgh political discussion is that through it's polemic nature it alienates.

So the very nature of these discussions is that you want an opponent to spank.

What I'm trying to say is that on this site, there is a hive of liberals with paddles, and a newbie will usually not react in an intellectually satisfying way for obvhous reasons. So if the liberals want playmates they need to be more toleratnt of opposing ideology.

It's not easy, opposing ideology is offputting to most.

0 Replies

And another story of a clergyman gone bad.I'm a sinner, please gove me your money!
Convicted Pastor Readies Return to Pulpit
By VICKIE CHACHERE

ST. PETERSBURG, Fla. (AP) - A Baptist minister whose fall from grace began with a fire his wife set at a home he had secretly bought with his mistress will walk out of prison on Sunday and head directly to the pulpit.

The Rev. Henry J. Lyons expects to be rededicated by other ministers at a ceremony Sunday and then preach a sermon at the First Baptist Institutional Church in Lakeland, about 55 miles northeast of St. Petersburg, his attorney, Larry Hardaway, said.

Lyons will have completed his prison sentence on grand theft and racketeering charges, but will remain on probation for the next three years on federal charges of including bank fraud and tax evasion. He also owes $2.5 million in restitution.

Wildly popular and charismatic, Lyons was at the height of his power as pastor of Bethel Metropolitan Baptist Church and president of the National Baptist Convention 1997, when Deborah Lyons set fire to the house.

The resulting investigation unmasked Lyons' use of his leadership role at the convention to access millions of dollars to finance his lavish lifestyle. Officials estimate that Lyons took about $4 million to buy luxury residences, jewelry and support his mistresses.

Prison life has left the 61-year-old Lyons thinner, but his friends said that more than four years behind bars have done nothing to diminish his skills as a minister or keep him from returning to the pulpit.

He and his wife have since divorced, and the woman at the center of the scandal, Bernice Edwards, died in prison earlier this year.

``He can pastor anywhere he wants to pastor in the United States of America,'' said Leon Highsmith, a member of Bethel Metropolitan's deacon board who has remained Lyons' friend.

Lyons declined recent requests for an interview, but in September, he told The St. Petersburg Times that he is now a changed man and said his downfall was caused by his attraction to a wealthy lifestyle.

``I know I need to be stronger morally,'' Lyons said. ``I need to say, 'no' to myself and others and mean it and stick with it.''

He said he spent some of his time behind bars ministering to other inmates.

Lyons rose to power with a blend of charisma, fiery preaching and undeniable political skills. When St. Petersburg erupted in rioting in 1996 after a police officer shot a black motorist, then-President Bill Clinton called on Lyons.

The Rev. James Macon, Bethel's associate pastor, a friend who said Lyons retains his magnetic personality.

``I don't think it's anything for show, that's the Henry Lyons I know,'' he said.

Lyons was on a trip to Africa when his wife discovered he had purchased a $700,000 waterfront home with Edwards, a convicted embezzler who worked with Lyons as the public relations director for the influential National Baptist Convention.

In 1998, Lyons was convicted of racketeering and grand theft.

He resigned as president of the National Baptist Convention and, in a deal with prosecutors, pleaded guilty to five federal charges of tax evasion, fraud and making false statements.

There is support for Lyons returning to Bethel Metropolitan, which has been without a pastor since spring. Lyons' successor was fired after clashes with church members.

Highsmith, who said he was speaking only for himself and not on behalf of the deacons, said there are some within the congregation who have forgiven Lyons and wouldn't object to his return.

``I look at this like Jim Bakker, (Jerry) Falwell. All these preachers who fell from man's grace, but they didn't fall from God's grace,'' he said. ``All these preachers are doing well. Henry Lyons is the same.''

11/29/03 14:24

0 Replies

If Blatham is really a teacher doesn't he automatically have more expertise than anyone else???

0 Replies

Craven

You raise several valid points all of which I agree with-----even the two "quibbles" Smile

I can't really relate to your point about wanting to control the direction of a thread Shocked

Lord I can't even predict how a person will react to a single sentence I've written, let alone try to control the direction of a whole thread. Laughing

Seriously though, your comments about the "hive" activity and the desire to remove the intruder by any and all means is a beautiful description of some behavior here and it certainly detracts from any attempt to engage in serious discussion. I especially liked one paragraph you wrote.

Craven wrote:

None of this is intellectually satisfying but untill you find a indefatigable and incredibly patient person who is willing to expend the energy of defending an outnumbered point of view with unfailing civility (in the face of sarcasm and insult at times) this is inevitable.

Perhaps your words will have some group benefit ------ but I wouldn't put any of my money on it.

0 Replies

Well it takes effort on all sides. It's something I consider unrealistically idealistic but if one is "a indefatigable and incredibly patient person who is willing to expend the energy of defending an outnumbered point of view with unfailing civility" they can still have meaningful conversation.

And if not that lofty ideal George's approach is also better than the other alternative. Making civility the priority is better than the worst alternative. Which is to take the implied position of an intruder and then decide to try to take a torch to the hive and flame.

It's not just the hive that affects the group dynamics, the reactions to the hive can negate the stings or more deeply entrench the hive's position.
In other words how you react is also important, when some see a hive they want to take a torch to it. You can see many newbies join to "school" liberals. And reacting this way engenders some of the alienating hostility.

0 Replies

Craven

Once again I totally agree and you've probably never heard that from me.

0 Replies

You're right, and that places me in unknown territory. Shocked

I'll go have some pie now.

0 Replies

Here ...

http://cajunnet2.cajunnet.com/~cajun/pecanpie.jpg

0 Replies

perception wrote:

Quote:
There was never just the golden dream of riches and bountiful nature, but always a scene of exploitation and false promises, indifference and ruthlessness, a kind of hollow core.

It doesn't matter that this quote is taken out of context -----it is without a doubt one of the most naive quotes imaginable and gives the impression that it was written by one who has never seen the outside of an artists loft in Manhattan.

It is as though America is the sole proprietor of the world of exploitation, false promises, indifference and ruthlessness.

We have never denied having a full share of faults just as Canada and every other nation has. We had a violent birth, followed by a violent existence up to this point and it's citizens have paid a heavy price emotionally. It has left many ugly scars but every time there was a need we stood up and were counted. I would contend that not many countries can equal that record and there is certainly no justification for the vile attitude shown us especially by Canada.

Er, have I missed something? Was Blatham trying to say that US taking of land from indigenous peoples was any worse than Canada's, or Australia's, for example? I think not.

I think he (or Didion) ARE saying that this attitude of seeing the world - or parts of it - as there for the furtherance of the US's aims and desires is still seen in current US policy - as, someone has rightly said, it has been there with preceding super-empires and powers - a position I would agree with, without necessarily seeing this as a peculiarly American thing. How would Canada, or Australia, be behaving with similar powers? Perhaps in the same way - perhaps it is an artifact of power and human tendencies, more than anything.

What I DO wonder is if the USA does have a greater than usual tendency to want to see itself as the "good" and anyone who is different as the "bad"? There is, for instance, I think, a greater religiosity and pomposity in the America's political "style" and the utterances of American politicians - although it does somewhat remind me of the jingoism of the British Empire - white man's burden and all that. Oh, and the ridiculous slogans of Communism in the USSR in its heyday

For instance, in its anti-communism, the USA was, as far as I know, the only first-world nation to ban the Communist Party. It seems to have a greater need to have its leaders appear personally and sexually virtuous - to be less tolerant publicly of human frailties and such.

This is only a small point - but I DO think that it is more dangerous to have a great power thinking god is on its side, genuinely, than for it to have a more realistic self-assessment - and I do think there are pressures for the US from its history and its culture to think this, than there are for many other countries.

0 Replies

(Having said that - there is also an amazing, and quite contradictory, openness to washing dirty linen in public, in the US.

As an example, I say (with shame) that, as a child, I was well aware of the iniquities of the treatment of American black people - when the realities of the same issue here were just dawning. Doh!

You guys are a big target.)

0 Replies

perception wrote:

blatham wrote:
perc

Well, my time teaching constitutes a very very small fraction of my time on the other side of that equation.

Blatham

This response is to something I had just written which Craven says was "insightful",and serves as a good example of what Craven was talking about. You absolutely refuse to acknowledge that my response had any substance or relevance. How can you expect anything but like replies to you.

Perc

I should have said more here. I apologize.

Your indictment for pedantry likely has merit. My daughter, and my nieces/nephews, refer to something in my two brothers and I which they describe as our 'teacher voice'. It's not a complimentary remark. Yet, I've long ago given up on the personal goal of understanding all the ways in which I might be obnoxious to others, as it was an overwhelming task. Now, I just assume all is OK until I feel the concussing passage of a howitzer shell near my temple.

But when I refered to 'that finest of intellectual moments' - the epiphany or revelation, I really wasn't thinking that it had to be me at the front of the lecture hall (at the same time, confessing that while doing standup, I did find centrality of attention more agreeable than sitting and listening to someone else's [usually] inferior jokes). I was really talking about the love of learning, a love of 'the life of the mind'. I prefer it to hockey.

0 Replies

Quote:

It is as though America is the sole proprietor of the world of exploitation, false promises, indifference and ruthlessness.

We have never denied having a full share of faults just as Canada and every other nation has. We had a violent birth, followed by a violent existence up to this point and it's citizens have paid a heavy price emotionally. It has left many ugly scars but every time there was a need we stood up and were counted. I would contend that not many countries can equal that record and there is certainly no justification for the vile attitude shown us especially by Canada.

Perc

You and I would disagree on whether or not on "we [america] have never denied having a full share of faults"...the converse of what you say is my contention precisely. But I'm not saying such denial is total, or even, necessarily, that it is unusual. But I am arguing that the specifics of the American case IN COMBINATION WITH OTHER FACTORS, particularly its power and influence, make those specific failings in self-awareness critically dangerous. No other nation, right now, is more correctly a target of study and criticism than the US because of this. Soon, China will very likely achieve new, and very significant, levels of power and influence too...and I'm praying they get a lot smarter about their own back-slapping mythologies.

0 Replies

Blatham -- Your response is really gracious and is a welcome end to what has been a most embarrassing, neurotic display from Craven. Sickening stuff. The more quickly it is forgotten, the better. Here's an article from the Guardian to cheer you up (!):

Quote:

Bush plans new nuclear weapons
'Bunker-buster' bombs set to end 10-year research ban Paul Harris in New York[/B]

Sunday November 30, 2003
The Observer

The United States is embarking on a multimillion-dollar expansion of its nuclear arsenal, prompting fears it may lead the world into a new arms race.

The Bush administration is pushing ahead with the development of a new generation of weapons, dubbed 'mini-nukes', that use nuclear warheads to penetrate underground bunkers.

Last week, it gave a quiet yet final go-ahead to a controversial research project into the bunker-buster. The move effectively ends a 10-year ban on research into 'low-yield' nuclear weapons. Critics fear it may lead other countries to push ahead with developing such weapons. It also comes at a highly sensitive time diplomatically, with the US lobbying countries such as Iran and North Korea to abandon their nuclear plans.

'The United States is spurring a new global arms race with our own development of a new generation of nuclear weapons,' said Democrat Ellen Tauscher, who led an unsuccessful bid in Congress to have the programme scrapped.

The new warheads are designed to use shockwaves to destroy deep bunkers even if the bomb does not reach them. Experience in Afghanistan and Iraq has shown army planners that bunkers are being built deeper and more securely. 'We have to be able to match our capability to our potential targets,' one White House official said.

But critics say the weapons won't work and doubt claims that the radiation will remain underground.

The US Army plans to convert two existing nuclear bombs - the B61 and B83. The B61 can be dropped by B-52 bombers or F-16 jets. The larger B83 has explosive yields of one to two megatons. Research will focus on hardening the bomb casings so they can penetrate layers of steel, rock and concrete.

Anti-nuclear campaigners say the B83's large size makes its classification as a 'mini-nuke' debatable. 'The powers that be describe them as low-yield weapons. But that is far from the case,' said Jay Coghlan, director of Nukewatch.

Critics also question the wisdom of developing such weapons and say America's willingness to deploy them will blur the distinction between nuclear war and conventional conflict. Bob Schaeffer, of the Anti-Nuclear Alliance, said: 'It is dangerous and provocative. It is like a drunk preaching temperance to everyone else at the bar, while ordering another round.'

Leading Democrats contend that the development of the bunker-buster is part of a broader re-evaluation of America's nuclear arsenal by George Bush's administration. They point to signs that nuclear weapons are being given a prominent role in the post-Cold War world, at a time when many others see them as obsolete. 'This White House has a dramatically different view of nuclear weapons compared with previous administrations,' said Tauscher. 'The administration's actions are having the opposite effect by erasing the taboo on the use of nuclear weapons. Russia has already indicated that it will develop new "tactical" weapons in response and no one doubts our enemies will follow suit.'

Since Bush announced a 'nuclear posture review' after coming to office, the administration has taken several steps to develop and modernise its nuclear arsenal to deter a wide range of threats, including chemical and biological weapons and what the review called 'surprising military developments'.

Three Tennessee Valley power stations have been selected to resume production of tritium, a substance used to increase the yield from a nuclear blast. Tritium has not been actively produced in the US for years and this is the first time civilian power plants have been scheduled for military use.

In April, the Los Alamos military laboratory in New Mexico produced the first 'plutonium pit' in America for more than a decade. Plutonium pits are triggers vital to the production of nuclear weapons and officials are pushing to get funding to build an entire new facility.

Concern also surrounds plans to cut the time needed to bring American underground nuclear testing sites back into working condition. Currently the time needed would be 24 months, but the administration has pushed for funds to reduce that to 18 months. While officials insist the US has no plans to resume nuclear testing - which would breach an international ban - critics say the enhanced preparations for a resumption are worrying.

'Why are they even talking about this now, unless something is planned? It makes no sense to us. America has the largest nuclear arsenal in the world, but it did not stop 9/11,' said Schaeffer.

http://observer.guardian.co.uk/international/story/0,6903,1096298,00.html

0 Replies

I'm not "embarrassed" at all. Maybe Tartarin is, but I'm not.

And as to the "neurotic" and "sickening" I can only chuckle. Her ad hominems here reinforce my point.

0 Replies

hamnet wrote:

If Blatham is really a teacher doesn't he automatically have more expertise than anyone else???

hamnet

Good teachers usually do have special expertise or knowledge, though that's probably not the quality that makes a teacher 'good'.

In self-description, I only claim to be an unusually vital sexual creature.

0 Replies

stop it, you two...or it's a detention

0 Replies

no comment on the pie...

0 Replies

deb

Both those posts are smack on the money! Good goil!

And it isn't, for me, simply the anxiety of living next to a huge loud elephant loaded with weapons and too large a share of hubris (like Britain ealier, yes), but also that I think America is, as Leonard Cohen said, 'the best of the worst'. If everyone will pardon another educational metaphor...it's like the student with particular and unusual potential who keeps shooting himself in the bloody foot.

And, for me as well deb...it took the awareness of racism against African Americans in the US - the open coflict of ideas and values in this political upheaval - which opened my eyes to how we here, quite unawares, were doing the same thing with our First Nations people.

Such openness - and the real risk of losing it, or significantly damaging it - relates directly to why I opened this thread, and to the articles that head it up.

0 Replies

Tartarin wrote:

Blatham -- Your response is really gracious and is a welcome end to what has been a most embarrassing, neurotic display from Craven. Sickening stuff. The more quickly it is forgotten, the better. Here's an article from the Guardian to cheer you up (!):

No--No---Tart----you don't "get off" that easily. Did you all notice how deftly Tart shilfted all blame to Blatham and Craven and at the same time denied any culpability in the recent unpleasantness on this and other threads? Tart you have no shame. You should not refuse the regal mantra of "Queen Bee of the Hive"

0 Replies

WHAT ROUGH BEAST? America sits of the edge

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know