How much longer must we tolerate mass culture?

The Devil's advocate

nobody@vox.com(Maxvan) — Wed, 09 Apr 2008 16:53:13 -0700

I use the phrase sloppily, as a kind of joke. I'll say things like 'I'm working for the devil", and mention the "dark overlords" at places i've worked. But I don't seriously believe that Satan worshippers run the world. That would be really crazy. Well, I think McCain meant it the same way I do, but, evidently, some folks take it seriously. I guess they've never heard of Freemasons,or their symbols, huh?

Read and post comments | Send to a friend

A moment for intolerance

nobody@vox.com(Maxvan) — Fri, 26 Oct 2007 22:29:47 -0700

Speaking of making things right:

I hope the parents of Matthew Snyder are successful, and sue the clothing off of Westboro Baptist Church. I realize that this is an extremely bad idea for free speech. I realize that, in the long run, I don't want people to be sued for what they say. But, if the protestors from Westboro Baptist cannot be tried for treason, which I believe they commit with their demonstrations against America at the burials of fallen US Soldiers, and if they cannot be tried for Hate crimes in their protests where they refer to homosexuals as "fags", and if they cannot be arrested for how they treat the flag (they might not burn them, but i've seen more than one on the ground) and if they cannot be tried for obscenity in how they conduct themselves as "christians", then, I hope they can at least be made poor.If that, even, cannot happen, then, I hope when they meet their God, even if it's in their own minds, they meet an Angry Vengeful God who hates them, personally, for the perversion of faith that they practice.

Oh, and while I do not condone swearing on my blog, there was a statement that NWA made about the police that I think you'll remember, even if you never listen to rap music. That sentiment is what I'd direct at Rev. Fred Phelps.

Read and post comments | Send to a friend

Believe it or not

nobody@vox.com(Maxvan) — Thu, 25 Oct 2007 21:00:27 -0700

You know that thing about the ninth configuration that creationists like to cite? The thing about how amino acids couldn't form on their own, and that the chances of it occurring randomly were incredibly unlikely? Well, Homer Jacobson has retracted the scientific paper used to justify this belief. Specifically, he cites the bit about Amino acids as not exactly the case: the amino acids would be extremely unlikely to form without a catalyst. What he's saying is that you can't just dump the chemicals, and create an amino acid. you need some form of energy. (Something the early earth had in abundance)

So, make that yet more for the near iron-clad case evolution has. Even I was fooled. I'm with Pete Townshend on that one.

But, I am confused about the kind of conservative Christian who'd want to argue for creation as science. I'd think that they'd be all in support of Mike Huckabee for president, but they're instead waiting for Giuliani to become one of them. I'd think they'd all want to move to Kansas,where they own some of the legislature, then cede from this godless nation, but the only movement to do something like that is aiming for the Carolinas. I'd guess that they'd be looking to heal the sick, feed the hungry, and clothe the poor, and love us all as much as they could, but instead, it's nothing but 'God hates Fags', shooting and bombing abortion clinics, declaring AIDS to be the wrath of a vengeful god, and stockpiling guns. i'm sorry, but i don't see much Christian in the Christian conservatives, but I guess i'm confused.

Read and post comments | Send to a friend

A thought about disaster

nobody@vox.com(Maxvan) — Thu, 25 Oct 2007 20:56:43 -0700

Oh, and speaking of "Home"; anybody else notice that the fires up by Malibu were at least half contained, if not completely by yesterday, while the fires on the southern end of San Diego aren't contained at all? It could be because Malibu is White, while the areas burning in San Diego are less white, or it could be because Malibu is Rich, which San Diego is less so, but I don't think so. At least not directly. The reason why Malibu is richer and whiter than San Diego is the same reason why they could fight those fires more easily: it's better property. It's built better, there's been more care taken to the landscaping, and more services are in place. It cannot be ignored that San Diego county has no Fire Department, instead relying upon city firefighters, exclusively. That's a function of a county governance that's thinking smaller and poorer than the neighbors elsewhere. If you're allergic to taxes, regardless how much you have in the bank, you're also under-developing your immunity to disaster. So, while Race and Class still matter to the equation, it's pushed a little further back, while politics comes a bit further forward.. Also, it should be noted that, so far, Schwarzenegger is doing a bang up job. Yeah, I might disagree with him on a few things, but actor or not, "governator" or not, he's doing a better job than I think Pete Wilson could've done. Probably even better than Jerry Brown, or that other actor, too. More's the pity that he is what he is, but all credit where it's due. Finally, while my loathing of what California has become tempts me to liken it to a modern Gomorrah, and think the fires are INRI (nature renewed by fire, made whole) it's not the wrath of an Angry God. It's an opportunity to become more human. We'll see if Southern California can do it. I sincerely hope that those who still have them reach out, and truly help those who no longer have homes, or other necessities.

Read and post comments | Send to a friend

Now that you're angry...

nobody@vox.com(Maxvan) — Sat, 13 Oct 2007 06:16:27 -0700

I suppose I've been a bit of a world traveller. I truly have seen many places that people who live next door to me have not. The opposite is true, as well. My neighbors have seen places I'll never see. It's part of the beauty that is the human experience. So, I might have some small understanding that I try to share. For example, the recent "A Common Word Between Us and You" letter makes perfect sense to me.Traditionally, Islam has the belief in respecting the "peoples of the Book', which is to say, there is a tradition in Islam of ecumenical outreach to both Jews and Christians. It's not always been practiced, but this outreach is definitely within that tradition. I think that it's unfortunate that people like the Wahhabists get called "traditional" in western media, because they really break from tradition in Islam in that they shun non-muslims.

Now, of course, I'm not Muslim, and that is for a reason, so I would never want to be confused for some sort of expert or apologist. I've got my issues with Islam, too. (For example, I'm not too certain if the Prophet was truly a Prophet. that's a pretty major reservation, right there. Also, I don't think I agree with the stance on women in the Qur'an. That's another big one.) However, I think that it's crucial that we share what understandings we do have, in any format we can. If we go on the way we have, it's going to turn into the major conflict of our time. I'd prefer for the major conflict of our time to be how we saved the environment to sustain human life for an indefinite period.

There are things that defy my understanding, of course. I cannot even pretend to understand the Japanese outlook. I know very little, and understand even less. For example, I don't understand how Shinto has no tradition of charity when supposedly it believes that everything (including grains of rice) has a soul. That makes no sense to me, but it also strikes me as a culture that must operate on thoughts very different to mine.

Then, again, things in my own culture defy me. For example, how can George Bush claim to be a christian, a religion based in concepts of charity,and think that he can deny aid to Graeme Frost? Can you imagine if Jesus had made the sermon "Help your neighbors, but only when you feel it's suitable" ? I bet that Christianity would be less than a footnote had that been the message.

But, unless we reach an understanding, world wide, I really think it's not only possible, but probable that all of our cultures won't even have a history to write a footnote on. The bacteria that remains to represent life will have no memory of us.

Read and post comments | Send to a friend

So, I guess I'll never learn

nobody@vox.com(Maxvan) — Sun, 19 Aug 2007 13:47:50 -0700

I'm friends with a fair number of people. Some are very conservative, some are very liberal. Some are quite religious in one direction, others are quite religious in another, and some aren't religious at all. So, I feel that asking for some degree of tolerance is reasonable.

In the past day, however, I've had two "liberal" friends condemn me, neither one realizing that they were. One was broadly proclaiming that if you weren't ready to vote for Obama, then, you must be a racist. The other was declaring that because of the waste on a few contracts, the entire Pentagon should be shut down, and all military sub-contractors should "be thrown in jail for being accessories to murder". Meanwhile, one of my more conservative friends condemned me by saying that "it's treason" to question the wisdom of the "unseen hand". I thought he was joking. Turns out, he wasn't. To Him, the free market is an article of faith, and if you disagree with his notion, you are "anti-american". Meanwhile, I've got a christian friend "praying for me" because I don't go to her church, and a Islamic friend asking me "why Americans want to kill me".....

Look, can we lay off the broad rhetoric? Is it possible that maybe, rather than looking for "black hats" and "white hats" we just try to talk to each other? Any chance of that, at all?

I mean, politically, I'm left of center (I think, anyway) but I'm not about to vote for most of the democrats, because they don't strike me as leaders. Sometimes I even agree with some of their ideas, but the way they phrase it seems, well, like they think I'm not a very good person. Or, they seem too strident. Or, they seem to lack conviction. I vote based upon platform, so, I'll probably end up voting for Edwards, and when the ticket is Clinton/Obama, I'll vote third party, again. I don't think that makes me a raving lunatic, do you?

As far as religion goes: I've got my beliefs, but they're mine, and no, I'm not sharing them. But, that doesn't mean that I think yours are wrong. Just don't tell me that you won't extend the same courtesy to me. See? I'm neither a zealot, nor a fiery heretic.

I just think that some of the issues at hand are far too important to drown them in self-righteousness, and insecurity. We need to talk, and not just consolidate our base. We need to try to understand each other, or there will be no need for understanding.

Yeah, I'm a pie-in-the-sky dreamer: I still believe that people are more important than, and that people can overcome beliefs.

Read and post comments | Send to a friend