really helps balance everyone's sorrow and brings love into tomorrow
the next days emotion the previous day had to borrow
with winter coming the farmers have to break out the farrow
to prepare the earth for next year's yield
if its not the cold weather that's getting you down
then for what reason pray tell does your face wear a frown
there is a carnival on the edge of town
crooked games and cotton candy.
[Written on 10/12/08]
Tuesday, December 02, 2008
There has been a lot of events on the world stage in recent weeks we intend to touch on at some point but feel we cannot do adequate justice to until the post election commentary we mentioned we were working on is completed. It was started on November 14, 2008 and worked on bit by bit as time allowed for it though we had not prior to today (when we worked on it some more) done anything on it since prior to Thanksgiving. And when we were working on it, the draft tangented off into another subject connected with it but at the same time different that we felt the need to segregate the two and tackle the latter one first.{1} So this we did in the days prior to Thanksgiving and want to recall that offering for you the reader at this time:
Revisiting the Subject of the Underlying Weltanschauung of "Language Control" (circa November 25, 2008)
Between that and our recent philosophical revisiting of the subject of comments boxes and the principles behind our longstanding refusal to have any at this humble weblog{2} that should suffice as far as expository style musings on this weblog until we finish the commentary itself which is about 90% completed as of this writing and we hope to have it finished for publishing on Friday of this week.
Notes:
{1} We did after all promise to be briefer in this treatment than any other post election commentary we have written but without losing an overall sense of relative completeness.
{2} On Reiterating Anew Our Comments Box Policy (circa December 1, 2008)
Revisiting the Subject of the Underlying Weltanschauung of "Language Control" (circa November 25, 2008)
Between that and our recent philosophical revisiting of the subject of comments boxes and the principles behind our longstanding refusal to have any at this humble weblog{2} that should suffice as far as expository style musings on this weblog until we finish the commentary itself which is about 90% completed as of this writing and we hope to have it finished for publishing on Friday of this week.
Notes:
{1} We did after all promise to be briefer in this treatment than any other post election commentary we have written but without losing an overall sense of relative completeness.
{2} On Reiterating Anew Our Comments Box Policy (circa December 1, 2008)
Monday, December 01, 2008
On Reiterating Anew Our Comments Box Policy:
(Musings of your humble servant at Rerum Novarum)
It is rare that we are at a loss to know what to blog at a given time and now is such a case. Part of the reason is that we have in some respects too much to do and not enough time to do it in and the window of time will be slamming even tighter in the coming months as we take on additional responsibilities for putting into action goals we have gone over before and indeed touched on anew late last month.{1} With these factors being a reality that cannot be evaded, it seems opportune to revisit a subject that we return to from time to time and that is the subject of comments boxes; ergo the purpose of this posting.
In starting this subject off, we will readily concede that our position is a minority one in the blogosphere and even on the internet in general. Most people who blog have that feature at their site and of course those who want to do so can of course do what they like. And often the treatments we have covered on this in periods of greater contention were defensive in nature -circumstances at the times lent themselves to that admittedly. But we also would be less than truthful if we did not own up to regretting some of the manner in which we expressed ourselves in those postings even though the substance of our positions remains the same. So while we will categorize previous treatments in footnote form on this weblog{2} and even perhaps borrow from some of them in covering this subject again, we intend to do so with a greater focus on being less deliberately provocative and treating on the subject in a briefer way than previously.
Readers with an interest in all the details pertaining to our view on this can review the other posts from years past with the aforementioned deficiencies of approach taken into account. But without further ado, here is why we do not have nor will we barring certain technological breakthroughs on this forum{3} change in our principled position one iota. But the substance of it all can be boiled down to something we said in our last extended treatment on this issue; ergo we refer to it now:
[T]hey are not strictly speaking required for interaction with others as there are many ways to get feedback. I interact with some of the more interesting emails or discussion list stuff on this blog -interesting to me that is and if I am not interested in the subject, it is not going to get dealt with here. Sometimes I get emails from people that they want posted as guest editorials and generally I am willing to do that too -even if I do not agree with viewpoint on the subject matter being posted. There are also times where I will interact with others on discussion lists, in chat logs, on message boards (occasionally) and in the comboxes of other weblogs: virtually none of which I have editorial control over and that is of no small significance.[...]...
Before I started blogging, I perused various weblogs and observed the manner in which comments boxes were handled by their participants. I came to realize after a period of observation that they cause more problems than they are worth most of the time and therefore decided to find other avenues for interaction with others when I got around to starting a blog of my own. This is why I never have had and never will have comboxes at Rerum Novarum of a general nature...
The primary reason I do not use comments boxes is because combox stuff is rarely up to snuff and I do not want to take the time to dig in the coal mines to find the rare diamond or two there may be. Someone who is moved enough to send an email is usually (though not always) going to put some thought into what they send. And I only use the cream of the emails I receive because I have no interest in playing "erect the strawman and knock him down" which much too frequently is what many of those of an "apologetics" mindset do.[...]
There is a serious lack of interest in logic and rational thought out there and I do not want to contribute to it either explicitly or by implication. For that reason, my interest is in taking the best possible argument shots people want to throw my way. There is also the part where I discuss only what I want to discuss at a given point in time. Emails may sit for a while unresponded to until I want to respond to them -usually my stock response to emailers if it is something that I intend to respond to is that I am "working on a response." That lets them know that they will be taken seriously when I do get around to responding to them and not infrequently they send a follow-up email expressing gratitude for that.[...]
In the end, it is quality over quantity and I will take the former any day of the week. [Excerpt from Rerum Novarum (circa January 26, 2007)]
We could delve deeper into the subject than that but there is no need to. It has always been essentially a matter of equal parts concern for quality interactions{4} and a lack of time on our part to police such endeavours which in our experience (observing them on other sites) can descend into the nastiest of invective unworthy of reasonable beings.
Of course those who want to use comments boxes can do so as they wish and that is fine with us. However, the idea that they somehow need to be used in order for there to be interaction with the points of view as propounded on this weblog or anywhere else is of course not true.{5}
And though we could also cite our diminishing time for blogging as one reason to not want to take on additional duties of combox monitoring, that takes a backseat to what we have long believed are rational and substantive reasons for our stance which hopefully this post serves to illustrate -both for those who misunderstand our reasons for this stance and also for others who (like us) believe they can be more hassle and produce less quality material than they are worth to endure most of the time.
Notes:
{1} On Thanksgivings Present and Past and What We Are Thankful For Now (circa November 27, 2008)
{2} In order from earliest to most recent on the matter and excluding any postings that did not to some extend extend or amplify previous comments on this subject:
Unlike major media outlets the contents of this blog are not a result of intense focus group testing nor Zogby-like polling data mind you; Rerum Novarum does not function that way. (So those who wrote about adding comments boxes, nada as I do not have the time to police them and besides: most of those who inquired about the comments boxes are not the sorts I would long tolerate posting in comments boxes at my blog.) The reason I have the occasional "guest editorial" policy is to bridge the gap if you will in that regard. [Excerpt from Rerum Novarum (circa September 30, 2002)]
I also blog and interact with emailers if (i) it is a subject I have not blogged on before (ii) it is a subject that interests me (iii) the emailer is polite and (iv) the emailer asks challenging questions. If the emailer is not polite, then their piece becomes fodder for potential fisking in accordance with my mood at the time.
I also interact with stuff on discussion lists, blogs, and the message boxes at other blogs and all of that is potentially bloggable as well. (And usually I email the link to the person so they can read and respond to it if they want to.) [Excerpt from Rerum Novarum (circa August 24, 2003)]
On the Comments Box Subject Revisited (circa June 6, 2005)
Briefly on Comboxes Again With Jonathan Prejean (circa June 10, 2005)
The Comments Box Subject Revisited (circa January 26, 2007)
{3} Now it is possible when I am able to transfer my blog to the new beta that I may have targeted comments allowed as that can be done on a post by post basis with the new software. But at the present time, I have too many posts for my archive to be moved to the new platform. We shall see when the time comes if a selective use of comboxes on a post by post basis is feasible to do or not. But that is as close as I will get to the comments box zeitgeist for reasons I noted in the text above. [Excerpt from Rerum Novarum (circa January 26, 2007)]
Ultimately that was not possible with the beta format but should that circumstance change, we would strongly consider making those kinds of occasional exceptions to the rule as noted above.
{4} By the lions share of those involved on the sites but (obviously) not everyone.
{5} See footnote two and the quote from the 2003 posting for some details.
(Musings of your humble servant at Rerum Novarum)
It is rare that we are at a loss to know what to blog at a given time and now is such a case. Part of the reason is that we have in some respects too much to do and not enough time to do it in and the window of time will be slamming even tighter in the coming months as we take on additional responsibilities for putting into action goals we have gone over before and indeed touched on anew late last month.{1} With these factors being a reality that cannot be evaded, it seems opportune to revisit a subject that we return to from time to time and that is the subject of comments boxes; ergo the purpose of this posting.
In starting this subject off, we will readily concede that our position is a minority one in the blogosphere and even on the internet in general. Most people who blog have that feature at their site and of course those who want to do so can of course do what they like. And often the treatments we have covered on this in periods of greater contention were defensive in nature -circumstances at the times lent themselves to that admittedly. But we also would be less than truthful if we did not own up to regretting some of the manner in which we expressed ourselves in those postings even though the substance of our positions remains the same. So while we will categorize previous treatments in footnote form on this weblog{2} and even perhaps borrow from some of them in covering this subject again, we intend to do so with a greater focus on being less deliberately provocative and treating on the subject in a briefer way than previously.
Readers with an interest in all the details pertaining to our view on this can review the other posts from years past with the aforementioned deficiencies of approach taken into account. But without further ado, here is why we do not have nor will we barring certain technological breakthroughs on this forum{3} change in our principled position one iota. But the substance of it all can be boiled down to something we said in our last extended treatment on this issue; ergo we refer to it now:
[T]hey are not strictly speaking required for interaction with others as there are many ways to get feedback. I interact with some of the more interesting emails or discussion list stuff on this blog -interesting to me that is and if I am not interested in the subject, it is not going to get dealt with here. Sometimes I get emails from people that they want posted as guest editorials and generally I am willing to do that too -even if I do not agree with viewpoint on the subject matter being posted. There are also times where I will interact with others on discussion lists, in chat logs, on message boards (occasionally) and in the comboxes of other weblogs: virtually none of which I have editorial control over and that is of no small significance.[...]...
Before I started blogging, I perused various weblogs and observed the manner in which comments boxes were handled by their participants. I came to realize after a period of observation that they cause more problems than they are worth most of the time and therefore decided to find other avenues for interaction with others when I got around to starting a blog of my own. This is why I never have had and never will have comboxes at Rerum Novarum of a general nature...
The primary reason I do not use comments boxes is because combox stuff is rarely up to snuff and I do not want to take the time to dig in the coal mines to find the rare diamond or two there may be. Someone who is moved enough to send an email is usually (though not always) going to put some thought into what they send. And I only use the cream of the emails I receive because I have no interest in playing "erect the strawman and knock him down" which much too frequently is what many of those of an "apologetics" mindset do.[...]
There is a serious lack of interest in logic and rational thought out there and I do not want to contribute to it either explicitly or by implication. For that reason, my interest is in taking the best possible argument shots people want to throw my way. There is also the part where I discuss only what I want to discuss at a given point in time. Emails may sit for a while unresponded to until I want to respond to them -usually my stock response to emailers if it is something that I intend to respond to is that I am "working on a response." That lets them know that they will be taken seriously when I do get around to responding to them and not infrequently they send a follow-up email expressing gratitude for that.[...]
In the end, it is quality over quantity and I will take the former any day of the week. [Excerpt from Rerum Novarum (circa January 26, 2007)]
We could delve deeper into the subject than that but there is no need to. It has always been essentially a matter of equal parts concern for quality interactions{4} and a lack of time on our part to police such endeavours which in our experience (observing them on other sites) can descend into the nastiest of invective unworthy of reasonable beings.
Of course those who want to use comments boxes can do so as they wish and that is fine with us. However, the idea that they somehow need to be used in order for there to be interaction with the points of view as propounded on this weblog or anywhere else is of course not true.{5}
And though we could also cite our diminishing time for blogging as one reason to not want to take on additional duties of combox monitoring, that takes a backseat to what we have long believed are rational and substantive reasons for our stance which hopefully this post serves to illustrate -both for those who misunderstand our reasons for this stance and also for others who (like us) believe they can be more hassle and produce less quality material than they are worth to endure most of the time.
Notes:
{1} On Thanksgivings Present and Past and What We Are Thankful For Now (circa November 27, 2008)
{2} In order from earliest to most recent on the matter and excluding any postings that did not to some extend extend or amplify previous comments on this subject:
Unlike major media outlets the contents of this blog are not a result of intense focus group testing nor Zogby-like polling data mind you; Rerum Novarum does not function that way. (So those who wrote about adding comments boxes, nada as I do not have the time to police them and besides: most of those who inquired about the comments boxes are not the sorts I would long tolerate posting in comments boxes at my blog.) The reason I have the occasional "guest editorial" policy is to bridge the gap if you will in that regard. [Excerpt from Rerum Novarum (circa September 30, 2002)]
I also blog and interact with emailers if (i) it is a subject I have not blogged on before (ii) it is a subject that interests me (iii) the emailer is polite and (iv) the emailer asks challenging questions. If the emailer is not polite, then their piece becomes fodder for potential fisking in accordance with my mood at the time.
I also interact with stuff on discussion lists, blogs, and the message boxes at other blogs and all of that is potentially bloggable as well. (And usually I email the link to the person so they can read and respond to it if they want to.) [Excerpt from Rerum Novarum (circa August 24, 2003)]
On the Comments Box Subject Revisited (circa June 6, 2005)
Briefly on Comboxes Again With Jonathan Prejean (circa June 10, 2005)
The Comments Box Subject Revisited (circa January 26, 2007)
{3} Now it is possible when I am able to transfer my blog to the new beta that I may have targeted comments allowed as that can be done on a post by post basis with the new software. But at the present time, I have too many posts for my archive to be moved to the new platform. We shall see when the time comes if a selective use of comboxes on a post by post basis is feasible to do or not. But that is as close as I will get to the comments box zeitgeist for reasons I noted in the text above. [Excerpt from Rerum Novarum (circa January 26, 2007)]
Ultimately that was not possible with the beta format but should that circumstance change, we would strongly consider making those kinds of occasional exceptions to the rule as noted above.
{4} By the lions share of those involved on the sites but (obviously) not everyone.
{5} See footnote two and the quote from the 2003 posting for some details.
Saturday, November 29, 2008
Having noted a pattern I have recently set down in no small detail (and that I have every intention of following on this humble weblog), here is another of the poems written earlier this year. Unlike an eight line stanza variation posted recently, this one a haiku but like the aforementioned poem, I had to use someone else's last line as the first line of my own poem. Without further ado...
dreaming sets you free
dont tell the government lest
they tax your slumbers
[Written on 2/13/08]
dreaming sets you free
dont tell the government lest
they tax your slumbers
[Written on 2/13/08]
Points to Ponder:
Habits of mind or of a person's general disposition take time to form and they are thus not going to change as quickly as we might like them too. But if the right approach is set down in advance and a proper strategery undertaken, the odds of success will be much greater in whatever the area of intended improvement happens to be. Just keep in mind the determination that you will succeed at whatever your goals are and do not let setbacks be anything but temporary delays.[Excerpt from Rerum Novarum (circa January 2, 2006)]
Habits of mind or of a person's general disposition take time to form and they are thus not going to change as quickly as we might like them too. But if the right approach is set down in advance and a proper strategery undertaken, the odds of success will be much greater in whatever the area of intended improvement happens to be. Just keep in mind the determination that you will succeed at whatever your goals are and do not let setbacks be anything but temporary delays.[Excerpt from Rerum Novarum (circa January 2, 2006)]
Thursday, November 27, 2008
On Thanksgivings Present and Past and What We Are Thankful For Now:
(Musings of your humble servant at Rerum Novarum)
As it sits right now, I have been sidetracked with my post election commentary though a significant revisiting of a key subject was recently issued{1} which will now be able to only briefly be touched on when that commentary is finished and ready for posting. It is an important issue most certainly but with Thanksgiving upon us, it seems appropriate to touch at least briefly on this and to mention the tradition of Thanksgiving presidential proclamations as well as reflect upon what we are thankful for here at Rerum Novarum. I noted briefly last year the first such proclamation as issued by President George Washington in 1789 and how often it referenced Almighty God; in fact, before moving onto what I want to do this year I need to revisit what I wrote last year on the matter so without further ado:
I also want to remind readers of President George Washington's Thanksgiving Proclamation of 1789. It is not that long a text indeed the previous sentence contains a link to it. But notice if you will how many references in the text are to God -fourteen in three paragraphs counting the signature of President Washington on a public act of the President of the United States. So those of you who are buying into that canard about the so-called "separation of church and state"[...] which has been paraded about in recent decades that dog will not hunt. [Excerpt from Rerum Novarum (circa November 22, 2007)]
This matter will be revisited later in the present posting but first I want to muse a bit on the subject of Thanksgiving and how my views on it are different this year than in any year of the millennium thus far.
To start with, it may come as a surprise that I have not written much on Thanksgiving at this weblog during its existence and not because of a lack of things to be thankful. However, on several fronts in recent years there has been no shortage of obstacles impeding my having a genuine sense of thankfulness by my own admission -areas I have gone over at times before but will simply note here briefly before moving on with these musings. Essentially, every Thanksgiving since 2000 was one where I had some anger at God for what had been taken from me that year or the previous one -though in the case of the one from 2000 it was looking back the best of a bunch{2} spanning from rotten to defective for a long time with the worst of the bunch (by far) being the one from 2001 which in so many ways was the worst year of my life.
And despite wishing readers a Happy Thanksgiving in 2002, I was not feeling thankful myself for that year or the previous one. 2003 was a little bit better year indeed on some levels that Thanksgiving was surprisingly pleasant as I noted at the time but it was still somewhat defective. 2004 was ok all things considered -I was too busy writing a post-election commentary at the time to comment on that year's celebration. (I note it here because it contains elements of the subject covered in more detail in the first footnote of this posting.)
I do not remember much about the one from 2005 because it was overshadowed with the news of my childhood best friend's passing away and that was something that will forever mar that year as far as I am concerned. 2006 was a pretty decent Thanksgiving -certainly the best one since 2003- I did not write on it at the time but it was spent at my sister's place eating food and playing board and card games. And last year's Thanksgiving was okay though it was marred a bit by my missing of one of my best friends who had recently exited my life.{3} That particular Thanksgiving also happened to be not long after I had finally decided definitively what I was long musing on insofar as a goal I wanted to attain{4} and making more solid efforts to go about it.
I know my friend's departure in the week prior to last year's Thanksgiving was the final tripping switch for me but in retrospect, I was moving inexorably towards that point at the time bit by bit. Nonetheless, on the evening of the day she left Seattle, I sat down and drafted in nearly one take the lions share of the blog posting which I later put up on the weblog announcing in outline both our intentions as well as the indefinite blogging priorities to be officially implemented at this humble weblog. To quote the pertinent parts of that posting at this time:
Readers may recall that a year and a week ago last Wednesday, we wrote on the subjects of the then-coming year (2007), a bit on foundational presuppositions, on warmer climates and the like. The post itself[...] was far more systematically laid out than the brief description just given but we want to touch very briefly on those key elements here as they play no small factor in what has been prevalent in our mind to a more explicit degree as last year unfolded.[...] They contribute to a proper understanding of what the future of this weblog's activity will involve from this point on in perpetuity...
The idea of living part of the year in a warmer climate[...] as far as being put on track towards being a practical reality took some time to jell into a cohesive plan. Nonetheless, as of roughly July of 2007, the outlines have finally solidified for us to make that desire a reality at some point in the new year.[...]
What has also formulated within the present writer is the steely resolution to make this happen. Little by little, steps have been taken to set that plan into concrete motion including the critical assessing of our current business templates which once everything is taken care of with the state compliance-wise will aid greatly in achieving our intentions in this area. Everything will be overhauled essentially and made a lot more efficient and productive along the lines of what was noted back in an October 2007 weblog post touching on Vilfredo Pareto's principle of economic efficiency. [Excerpts from Rerum Novarum (circa January 11, 2008)]
When those words were written initially, we had decided definitively on what we were going to do but it was not until the following month that a significant opportunity to expedite those goals fell into our lap which enabled us to begin really pushing towards the goal at hand. For one thing, the new business venture required the assistance of one of the few people we trust for key aspects to be tended to; ergo, our friend returned to Seattle to aid in that respect in early February of this year. However, the wheels fell off of that cart later this year when some unexpected and unforeseen disasters took place.
The fallout created a period of drift for my friend and I which required that things be salvaged if the plan was to eventually happen as we both want it to. Towards that end, additional research was conducted by yours truly, and my friend and I put together a completely new plan of action which I eventually had codified into precise steps to facilitate the desired outcome.{5} However, the problem with reformulating the plan was it delayed by at least a year the realization of the goal which when the posting of January 11, 2008 was put up was seen as being about six months in the future.{6}
And though the process itself has had to be shelved temporarily to tend to more immediate matters of importance, it will be resumed before Christmas so that the mission is realized at some point in 2009.{7} So with those factors in mind and how the work we have put into this goal has gotten to the present point, I can actually say I am thankful this year and mean it. The combination of the goals being on target to be achieved is only part of it though, there are others too such as being thankful for good health, etc. Another reason for being thankful in my mind is my reflecting in spare moments the losses of the new millennium and how time has to some extent healed many of the wounds albeit not completely{8} -but significantly enough to where we can have a real appreciation again for many things.
We are thankful for being alive and for the most part remarkably together considering all we have faced in recent years. We are also thankful for family which we still have even those for whom things are not without their tensions. We are thankful for our friends both those of longstanding and those who we have been able to reconcile with after rougher times in years past. And of course we are thankful for being born into and able to live in what is still the greatest nation on earth.{9} And with those feelings of gratitude in mind, I want to return to the subject of presidential Thanksgiving proclamations which was touched on earlier with the revisiting of the first as issued by President George Washington.
President Washington issued a Thanksgiving proclamation in 1789 and another one in 1795 though at the time there was not a fixed national holiday on the matter so they were issued at different times of the respective years.{10} President John Adams issued Thanksgiving proclamations in 1798 and 1799 -presumably the struggles for trying to achieve a peaceful settlement to the Undeclared War with France at the time coupled with a rather bitter election year combined to sour President Adams on making a Thanksgiving proclamation for the year 1800. President Thomas Jefferson was elected that year and for eight years he broke with the precedent of Washington and Adams by not issuing a single Thanksgiving proclamation.
The practice was revived briefly by his successor President James Madison who issued proclamations in late 1814 and early 1815 corresponding to a successful ending to a war that was a near-disaster for the nation's very existence.{11} But presumably because of the great successes of America as a growing nation both in riches as well as power subsequent to 1815, there was not the same perceived need to have days of Thanksgiving. For that reason perhaps, the practice fell into disuse after 1815 and there was not another proclamation of thanksgiving issued by a president until President Abraham Lincoln issued one in 1862 when the nation was at war with itself.
However, President Lincoln was not following precisely in the footsteps of his predecessors with the issuance of such proclamations in 1862 and early 1863 because they were issued giving thanks for specific victories at war rather than for more general blessings of God upon the nation. So strictly speaking, they do not constitute a resumption of the Washington tradition. It was with a second proclamation issued in late 1863 which restarted the annual tradition of such presidential proclamations thanking God for the blessings He has bestowed upon the nation. And with 1864, we have President Lincoln affixing the annual celebration as a national holiday on the last Thursday of November every year which has remained so unto the present day.{12} And I want to close these musings by recalling the 1864 Thanksgiving proclamation of President Abraham Lincoln issued at a time of tremendous struggle for the very soul of the nation; incidentally, many might claim we are at a similar crossroads today. But without further ado...
It has pleased Almighty God to prolong our national life another year, defending us with His guardian care against unfriendly designs from abroad and vouchsafing to us in His mercy many and signal victories over the enemy, who is of our own household. It has also pleased our Heavenly Father to favor as well our citizens in their homes as our soldiers in their camps and our sailors on the rivers and seas with unusual health. He has largely augmented our free population by emancipation and by immigration, while He has opened to use new sources of wealth and has crowned the labor of our workingmen in every department of industry with abundant rewards. Moreover, He has been pleased to animate and inspire our minds and hearts with fortitude, courage, and resolution sufficient for the great trial of civil war into which we have been brought by our adherence as a nation to the cause of freedom and humanity, and to afford to us reasonable hopes of an ultimate and happy deliverance from all our dangers and afflictions :
Now, therefore, I, Abraham Lincoln, President of the United States, do hereby appoint and set apart the last Thursday in November next as a day which I desire to be observed by all my fellow-citizens, wherever they may then be, as a day of thanksgiving and praise to Almighty God, the beneficent Creator and Ruler of the Universe. And I do further recommend to my fellow-citizens aforesaid that on that occasion they do reverently humble themselves in the dust and from thence offer up penitent and fervent prayers and supplications to the Great Disposer of Events for a return of the inestimable blessings of peace, union, and harmony throughout the land which it has pleased Him to assign as a dwelling place for ourselves and for our posterity throughout all generations.
In testimony whereof I have hereunto set my hand and caused the seal of the United States to be affixed.
Done at the city of Washington, this 20th day of October, A.D. 1864, and of the Independence of the United States the eighty-ninth.
May you all have a happy and blessed Thanksgiving!!!
Notes:
{1} Revisiting the Subject of the Underlying Weltanschauung of "Language Control" (circa November 25, 2008)
{2} Looking back though, I would take twenty more Thanksgivings like it compared to the ones I have been through since because it was the last one I spent with my father before he died.
{3} Thankfully she was to return a few months later.
{4} One of the plans for the new year (though not officially a resolution) is to figure out a way to live part of the year in a warmer climate. [Excerpt from Rerum Novarum (circa January 2, 2007)]
{5} It will have to be revised and expanded when what is set in place is completed but I have set down in business flow chart format all the required steps as well as the initial costs for start up to get this business operating.
{6} This is a long story and not one I want to go into at the present time.
{7} There is not a precise date for the completion of the plan, only certain financial milestones that need to be met as well as certain target profit goals of the business before the planned move can take place. At a minimum by current projections, it will happen in July of 2009 but it is possible even if what is required to meet that target goal occurs on schedule that we may postpone it a bit longer and leave in September of 2009. (Though if things go at a faster than predicted pace, we are not above shooting for a June 2009 departure though admittedly that would probably not be feasible the way things are looking right now.)
{8} I doubt they ever will completely heal.
{9} I say this despite an acute awareness of the actual (as opposed to the fictitious) historical warts on this country's past.
{10} In October for 1789 and in January for 1795.
{11} I refer here to The War of 1812 which spanned from June 18, 1812 to March 23, 1815.
{12} This year's presidential Thanksgiving proclamation was issued by President George W. Bush on November 21, 2008 and can be viewed here for those who are interested.
(Musings of your humble servant at Rerum Novarum)
As it sits right now, I have been sidetracked with my post election commentary though a significant revisiting of a key subject was recently issued{1} which will now be able to only briefly be touched on when that commentary is finished and ready for posting. It is an important issue most certainly but with Thanksgiving upon us, it seems appropriate to touch at least briefly on this and to mention the tradition of Thanksgiving presidential proclamations as well as reflect upon what we are thankful for here at Rerum Novarum. I noted briefly last year the first such proclamation as issued by President George Washington in 1789 and how often it referenced Almighty God; in fact, before moving onto what I want to do this year I need to revisit what I wrote last year on the matter so without further ado:
I also want to remind readers of President George Washington's Thanksgiving Proclamation of 1789. It is not that long a text indeed the previous sentence contains a link to it. But notice if you will how many references in the text are to God -fourteen in three paragraphs counting the signature of President Washington on a public act of the President of the United States. So those of you who are buying into that canard about the so-called "separation of church and state"[...] which has been paraded about in recent decades that dog will not hunt. [Excerpt from Rerum Novarum (circa November 22, 2007)]
This matter will be revisited later in the present posting but first I want to muse a bit on the subject of Thanksgiving and how my views on it are different this year than in any year of the millennium thus far.
To start with, it may come as a surprise that I have not written much on Thanksgiving at this weblog during its existence and not because of a lack of things to be thankful. However, on several fronts in recent years there has been no shortage of obstacles impeding my having a genuine sense of thankfulness by my own admission -areas I have gone over at times before but will simply note here briefly before moving on with these musings. Essentially, every Thanksgiving since 2000 was one where I had some anger at God for what had been taken from me that year or the previous one -though in the case of the one from 2000 it was looking back the best of a bunch{2} spanning from rotten to defective for a long time with the worst of the bunch (by far) being the one from 2001 which in so many ways was the worst year of my life.
And despite wishing readers a Happy Thanksgiving in 2002, I was not feeling thankful myself for that year or the previous one. 2003 was a little bit better year indeed on some levels that Thanksgiving was surprisingly pleasant as I noted at the time but it was still somewhat defective. 2004 was ok all things considered -I was too busy writing a post-election commentary at the time to comment on that year's celebration. (I note it here because it contains elements of the subject covered in more detail in the first footnote of this posting.)
I do not remember much about the one from 2005 because it was overshadowed with the news of my childhood best friend's passing away and that was something that will forever mar that year as far as I am concerned. 2006 was a pretty decent Thanksgiving -certainly the best one since 2003- I did not write on it at the time but it was spent at my sister's place eating food and playing board and card games. And last year's Thanksgiving was okay though it was marred a bit by my missing of one of my best friends who had recently exited my life.{3} That particular Thanksgiving also happened to be not long after I had finally decided definitively what I was long musing on insofar as a goal I wanted to attain{4} and making more solid efforts to go about it.
I know my friend's departure in the week prior to last year's Thanksgiving was the final tripping switch for me but in retrospect, I was moving inexorably towards that point at the time bit by bit. Nonetheless, on the evening of the day she left Seattle, I sat down and drafted in nearly one take the lions share of the blog posting which I later put up on the weblog announcing in outline both our intentions as well as the indefinite blogging priorities to be officially implemented at this humble weblog. To quote the pertinent parts of that posting at this time:
Readers may recall that a year and a week ago last Wednesday, we wrote on the subjects of the then-coming year (2007), a bit on foundational presuppositions, on warmer climates and the like. The post itself[...] was far more systematically laid out than the brief description just given but we want to touch very briefly on those key elements here as they play no small factor in what has been prevalent in our mind to a more explicit degree as last year unfolded.[...] They contribute to a proper understanding of what the future of this weblog's activity will involve from this point on in perpetuity...
The idea of living part of the year in a warmer climate[...] as far as being put on track towards being a practical reality took some time to jell into a cohesive plan. Nonetheless, as of roughly July of 2007, the outlines have finally solidified for us to make that desire a reality at some point in the new year.[...]
What has also formulated within the present writer is the steely resolution to make this happen. Little by little, steps have been taken to set that plan into concrete motion including the critical assessing of our current business templates which once everything is taken care of with the state compliance-wise will aid greatly in achieving our intentions in this area. Everything will be overhauled essentially and made a lot more efficient and productive along the lines of what was noted back in an October 2007 weblog post touching on Vilfredo Pareto's principle of economic efficiency. [Excerpts from Rerum Novarum (circa January 11, 2008)]
When those words were written initially, we had decided definitively on what we were going to do but it was not until the following month that a significant opportunity to expedite those goals fell into our lap which enabled us to begin really pushing towards the goal at hand. For one thing, the new business venture required the assistance of one of the few people we trust for key aspects to be tended to; ergo, our friend returned to Seattle to aid in that respect in early February of this year. However, the wheels fell off of that cart later this year when some unexpected and unforeseen disasters took place.
The fallout created a period of drift for my friend and I which required that things be salvaged if the plan was to eventually happen as we both want it to. Towards that end, additional research was conducted by yours truly, and my friend and I put together a completely new plan of action which I eventually had codified into precise steps to facilitate the desired outcome.{5} However, the problem with reformulating the plan was it delayed by at least a year the realization of the goal which when the posting of January 11, 2008 was put up was seen as being about six months in the future.{6}
And though the process itself has had to be shelved temporarily to tend to more immediate matters of importance, it will be resumed before Christmas so that the mission is realized at some point in 2009.{7} So with those factors in mind and how the work we have put into this goal has gotten to the present point, I can actually say I am thankful this year and mean it. The combination of the goals being on target to be achieved is only part of it though, there are others too such as being thankful for good health, etc. Another reason for being thankful in my mind is my reflecting in spare moments the losses of the new millennium and how time has to some extent healed many of the wounds albeit not completely{8} -but significantly enough to where we can have a real appreciation again for many things.
We are thankful for being alive and for the most part remarkably together considering all we have faced in recent years. We are also thankful for family which we still have even those for whom things are not without their tensions. We are thankful for our friends both those of longstanding and those who we have been able to reconcile with after rougher times in years past. And of course we are thankful for being born into and able to live in what is still the greatest nation on earth.{9} And with those feelings of gratitude in mind, I want to return to the subject of presidential Thanksgiving proclamations which was touched on earlier with the revisiting of the first as issued by President George Washington.
President Washington issued a Thanksgiving proclamation in 1789 and another one in 1795 though at the time there was not a fixed national holiday on the matter so they were issued at different times of the respective years.{10} President John Adams issued Thanksgiving proclamations in 1798 and 1799 -presumably the struggles for trying to achieve a peaceful settlement to the Undeclared War with France at the time coupled with a rather bitter election year combined to sour President Adams on making a Thanksgiving proclamation for the year 1800. President Thomas Jefferson was elected that year and for eight years he broke with the precedent of Washington and Adams by not issuing a single Thanksgiving proclamation.
The practice was revived briefly by his successor President James Madison who issued proclamations in late 1814 and early 1815 corresponding to a successful ending to a war that was a near-disaster for the nation's very existence.{11} But presumably because of the great successes of America as a growing nation both in riches as well as power subsequent to 1815, there was not the same perceived need to have days of Thanksgiving. For that reason perhaps, the practice fell into disuse after 1815 and there was not another proclamation of thanksgiving issued by a president until President Abraham Lincoln issued one in 1862 when the nation was at war with itself.
However, President Lincoln was not following precisely in the footsteps of his predecessors with the issuance of such proclamations in 1862 and early 1863 because they were issued giving thanks for specific victories at war rather than for more general blessings of God upon the nation. So strictly speaking, they do not constitute a resumption of the Washington tradition. It was with a second proclamation issued in late 1863 which restarted the annual tradition of such presidential proclamations thanking God for the blessings He has bestowed upon the nation. And with 1864, we have President Lincoln affixing the annual celebration as a national holiday on the last Thursday of November every year which has remained so unto the present day.{12} And I want to close these musings by recalling the 1864 Thanksgiving proclamation of President Abraham Lincoln issued at a time of tremendous struggle for the very soul of the nation; incidentally, many might claim we are at a similar crossroads today. But without further ado...
It has pleased Almighty God to prolong our national life another year, defending us with His guardian care against unfriendly designs from abroad and vouchsafing to us in His mercy many and signal victories over the enemy, who is of our own household. It has also pleased our Heavenly Father to favor as well our citizens in their homes as our soldiers in their camps and our sailors on the rivers and seas with unusual health. He has largely augmented our free population by emancipation and by immigration, while He has opened to use new sources of wealth and has crowned the labor of our workingmen in every department of industry with abundant rewards. Moreover, He has been pleased to animate and inspire our minds and hearts with fortitude, courage, and resolution sufficient for the great trial of civil war into which we have been brought by our adherence as a nation to the cause of freedom and humanity, and to afford to us reasonable hopes of an ultimate and happy deliverance from all our dangers and afflictions :
Now, therefore, I, Abraham Lincoln, President of the United States, do hereby appoint and set apart the last Thursday in November next as a day which I desire to be observed by all my fellow-citizens, wherever they may then be, as a day of thanksgiving and praise to Almighty God, the beneficent Creator and Ruler of the Universe. And I do further recommend to my fellow-citizens aforesaid that on that occasion they do reverently humble themselves in the dust and from thence offer up penitent and fervent prayers and supplications to the Great Disposer of Events for a return of the inestimable blessings of peace, union, and harmony throughout the land which it has pleased Him to assign as a dwelling place for ourselves and for our posterity throughout all generations.
In testimony whereof I have hereunto set my hand and caused the seal of the United States to be affixed.
Done at the city of Washington, this 20th day of October, A.D. 1864, and of the Independence of the United States the eighty-ninth.
May you all have a happy and blessed Thanksgiving!!!
Notes:
{1} Revisiting the Subject of the Underlying Weltanschauung of "Language Control" (circa November 25, 2008)
{2} Looking back though, I would take twenty more Thanksgivings like it compared to the ones I have been through since because it was the last one I spent with my father before he died.
{3} Thankfully she was to return a few months later.
{4} One of the plans for the new year (though not officially a resolution) is to figure out a way to live part of the year in a warmer climate. [Excerpt from Rerum Novarum (circa January 2, 2007)]
{5} It will have to be revised and expanded when what is set in place is completed but I have set down in business flow chart format all the required steps as well as the initial costs for start up to get this business operating.
{6} This is a long story and not one I want to go into at the present time.
{7} There is not a precise date for the completion of the plan, only certain financial milestones that need to be met as well as certain target profit goals of the business before the planned move can take place. At a minimum by current projections, it will happen in July of 2009 but it is possible even if what is required to meet that target goal occurs on schedule that we may postpone it a bit longer and leave in September of 2009. (Though if things go at a faster than predicted pace, we are not above shooting for a June 2009 departure though admittedly that would probably not be feasible the way things are looking right now.)
{8} I doubt they ever will completely heal.
{9} I say this despite an acute awareness of the actual (as opposed to the fictitious) historical warts on this country's past.
{10} In October for 1789 and in January for 1795.
{11} I refer here to The War of 1812 which spanned from June 18, 1812 to March 23, 1815.
{12} This year's presidential Thanksgiving proclamation was issued by President George W. Bush on November 21, 2008 and can be viewed here for those who are interested.
Tuesday, November 25, 2008
Revisiting the Subject of the Underlying Weltanschauung of "Language Control":
(Musings of your humble servant at Rerum Novarum)
[Prefatory Note: I decided to handle this matter in its own posting so it does not make my planned election commentary any longer than necessary.]
I have discussed this subject at sundry times and in divers manners in years gone by{1} and have decided the time has come to touch on the matter again. The circumstances are not exactly the same as some of the times I have explicitly{2} gone over this before but the value of timeless principles is that they are admitting of a variety of applications depending on changed circumstances.{3} For that reason, I want to precede the election commentary I am working on with a revisiting of the subject of language control to avoid having to quote large chunks of other postings in that commentary in the form of footnotes.{4}
To start with, I have as long as I can remember resisted being typecast by the many who have tried in one form or another. One reason for this is my views are not easy to categorize into any one "school of thought" in part because while there are degrees of systematization to how I view various issues; there is also a good degree of what could be called "cross-pollination" as a result of the amount of study I have done in my life on a panoply of subjects. But to it seems not a few people, something I have written or a view I would appear to concur with even if only in part is presumed to be my view. This kind of approach is more than a bit deceptive and persons who make such presumptions are thus inexorably wrong and often stunningly so. Or as I have said in a multiplicity of ways over the years including quite recently{5}: similarity is not the same as identity.
What does all of this have to do with "language control" is something probably crossing the minds of many who read these words. Well, for one thing, when you have the combination of seriously misunderstanding someones view coupled with the tendency most people have towards trying to find easy ways to categorize things, it can involve no small degree of miscategorization. And while this would not per se be a problem in and of itself, it can very well be if you also have in the mix those who try to define the terms of categorization in a way to give the impression that those so categorized should have their views{6} dismissed without fair consideration. This is the methodology of the propagandist after all. Any cursory reading of history should open one's eyes to the various ways people can have their humanity reduced in the eyes of others by means of varied forms of propaganda and this does not only apply to totalitarianist viewpoints of the most explicit and horrifying kind. It also applies to those who in a variety of ways fit the bill for what the late Senator Barry M. Goldwater called "those gentler collectivists who ask our permission to play God with the human race" though they do not often merely ask for such permissions anymore.{7}
Such persons will always find a foe in those such as your humble blog host who take seriously not only the concept of ideas but actual ideas themselves and recognize their power both in potentiality as well as actuality{8}, the importance of controlling the terms of identification if you will becomes in my mind pretty self-evident for those who ponder this matter syllogistically.
Or as has been noted on this weblog in years past in various ways{9} engineering of a social nature in whatever area one seeks to do it is always preceded by an engineering of a verbal nature. The reason for this is because in order to engineer things in actuality you first have to engineer them abstractly or in the realm of ideas for everything that is or ever will be starts with an idea. So if engineering requires precedence in the area of verbality before being manifested in actuality, then to fight the former with the greatest likelihood of success you must take a stand on the latter.
Because the moment we allow those who would seek to enslave us to coin their own terminology in reasonable sounding prose is the moment we give them the pretense of nobility for whatever nefarious scheme they are seeking to push onto us. Thus we get euthanasia promoted under terms such as "death with dignity", homosexual liaisons promoted by an attempted hijacking and redefinition of the term "marriage",{10} etc. -all of which provides the cultural wolves the cover of sheep's fleece to cloak themselves in to more easily hoodwink the unsuspecting masses. They want to control the terms of the battle because they can thereby put their opposition at a significant disadvantage positionally. And that is the first step towards putting their God-given rights at risk in reality; ergo they need to be fought positionally and on principles and not be allowed to set the terms for any debate.
This is why I have long said that I will not allow others to control the terms of any subject matter I am involved in{11} and my opposition at times can be pretty strident on this. Even if the subject involved may appear trivial to the casual observer, the underlying issue is where the matter of principle is with me my friends. Hence though the circumstances can differ, the principles behind my actions in a panoply of situations remain unchanged.
To give two examples of seemingly inconsequential subject matters, I was at one point quite strident in battling the attempt to typecast me as a writer of certain theological views characterized as "traditionalist" in nature. I have also steadfastly refused to allow people to caricature me as a Republican or in any way as a spokesman for the outgoing administration of whom I have had nearly as much disagreement with as agreement{12} over the years. Both of these do not seem significant but part of the reason was my concern to try and head off these matters in their most embryonic of stages before things developed further. And while on the former I have been quite successful, the latter has taken a bit more work and I am not so sure "victory" has been achieved there yet though the overall signs have been generally quite positive as I see them. But that is neither here nor there.
The principle I refer to in the above examples also extends to my reasons for demanding at times that users of certain buzzwords define said terms or cease using them altogether as "definitions are the tools of thought" (cf. M. Mentzer); ergo thought cannot be well cultivated in an environment where the words used are not given workable meanings. The failure to do this philosophically leads to what I call rational nominalism{13} which is a form of the epistemological fallacy of solipsism.{14} Theologically this principle manifests itself in what was once misappropriately called modernism.{15}
It also bears noting that often those opposed to a particular view will caricature it in a gross manner and those sympathetic often react to this by seeming to embrace and magnify the caricatured elements both of their own side as well as the other side. I do not and never have liked this kind of polemics{16} because it does not serve the cause of truth well however the latter is perceived by the parties in question.{17} And it does advertise well the lesser angels of our natures when those are the kinds of writings which get the most attention oftentimes to the detriment of ones where serious points of reference are put forward for potentially productive dialogue.
Yes in one sense it is a war of words but as I firmly believe that everything including our very existence as persons started with an idea{18}; ergo principles and ideas are of the utmost importance to me. People have fought for ideas and even died for them since the dawn of time. I do not feel therefore that ideas deserve to be treated as anything less than what they are which is merely the first points of contact with something that is of tremendous power potentially before it can be effectively realized in reality. That makes ideas quite powerful and therefore deserving of our respect in how they are interacted with -certainly a hell of a lot more respect than most people care to accord them in this day and age of increasing barbarity but I digress.
Notes:
{1} To note some stuff from the archives in past years in order from oldest to most recent pertaining to this subject:
On the Underlying Weltanschauung of Language Control (circa August 30, 2003)
On the Use of Labels -A Rerum Novarum Miscellaneous BLOG Posting (circa August 30, 2003)
On Workable Remedies for Society's Problems -Dialogue With Kevin Tierney (circa March 31, 2004)
[That] I recognize (for tactical or other reasons) certain exceptions is an indicator that there is no such thing as an immutable rule on these matters. There are however principles that construct my rule of discourse if you will and one of them is not ceding to opposing viewpoints the right to define the terms of dialogue. It might sound arrogant but I insist on defining those terms myself or (at the very least) relegating that to a stalemate in finding terms that each party can concur with. It sounds petty but propaganda is a matter of language and perceptions which are generated by images or concepts play a strong role in the matter. I am not saying that I am a propagandist of course[...]; however, as one who knows how propaganda works, I do what I can to not allow myself to be so caricatured by those who disagree with me. [Excerpt from Rerum Novarum (circa June 2, 2004)]
Since at least the point in 2004 where the above example was blogged up to the current posting, to my knowledge, all of the examples of my noting this principle in various subjects and circumstances on this weblog have come more from actual implementation of it rather than calling attention to it explicitly as was the case in the other links noted above.
{2} Rarely has it been discussed directly at this humble weblog but often it has been addressed in implicit or less recognizable ways.
{3} [A] subject as a rule needs to be of contemporary significance to be of interest to me in its discussing. This can take many forms including but not limited to (i) something that interests me that I have a reasonable degree of knowledge about which I may not have discussed before and want to discuss for some reason, (ii) that someone emails me on a subject previously discussed and I am predisposed for some reason to discuss it again at or approximate to that time, (iii) contemporary events which provide for the opportunity to in some fashion expound on timeless principles pertaining in some fashion or another to the subject so discussed, (iv) something I recall from reading which is of interest to me at a given moment in time, or (v) a situation whereby some additional threads can be added to the mosaic of subjects which have been of interest to me at various times as a way of further refining through development my views on a given subject matter. [Excerpt from Rerum Novarum (circa November 27, 2006)]
{4} I did promise brevity to the extent that would be possible of course which is part of what makes a posting like this an opportune one at the present time.
{5} On "Consequentialism", "Proportionalism", and a Lesson in General Norms of Interpretation, Theological or Otherwise (circa October 6, 2008)
{6} Or should I say, their views in the manner in which they have been often misrepresented by the one doing the categorizing thereof.
{7} No, they have gone from merely asking to do these things to trying through a variety of perversions of law and government to impose themselves onto others to deprive people of their fundamental God-given rights in the name of what they call "progress." As a fundamentally conservative person (but not a fundamentalist: again similarity is not the same as identity), I find this to be appalling but history proves the corruption that power oftentimes has in proportion to the amount it is possessed.
{8} [A]s far as I am concerned, arguing for a position on its intrinsic merits or lack thereof utilizing the tools of reason and logic is a serious business and far too many of a sophistic bent either do not realize this or they fail to take seriously the principle that ideas are serious things.
People have fought for ideas, they have died for ideas, and this has not only not changed in the present but these things still occur. Therefore, what someone is willing to involve themselves in (should they set foot into the arena of ideas) should be focused on primary or serious matters and not secondary or ancillary griping. [Excerpt from Rerum Novarum (circa June 28, 2006)]
{9} I for my part want nothing to do with this scuffling nor will I allow others to label me - even if they attempt to do so as a kind of "reference point" in a discussion.[...] Again, I either control the vernacular or we relegate it to a stalemate. The moment I as a rule allow others to do so[...] is the moment that I begin to give control of the arena to someone else. And that my friends is (i) not something I have ever done and (ii) it simply is not going to happen at any time in the future. [Excerpt from Rerum Novarum (circa August 30, 2003)]
{10} However, wherever, and whatever pretext one might use in defining this term, the variety of forms marriage has taken since the dawn of time have one constituent element to them that is the same: that marriage is between human beings of the opposite sex. To propose an application to this term of an arrangement that does not involve this constituent element is to do violence to the principle of words meaning things and with a concept that is the root and matrix of civilization itself.
{11} I have always recognized that at times concessions are required in this area, the underlying principle is to control the terms used in the arena of ideas as much as it is possible to do. Or as I noted to Charles de Nunzio when discussing this in the context of so-called homosexual "marriage" back in mid 2004:
[That] I recognize (for tactical or other reasons) certain exceptions is an indicator that there is no such thing as an immutable rule on these matters. There are however principles that construct my rule of discourse if you will and one of them is not ceding to opposing viewpoints the right to define the terms of dialogue. It might sound arrogant but I insist on defining those terms myself or (at the very least) relegating that to a stalemate in finding terms that each party can concur with. It sounds petty but propaganda is a matter of language and perceptions which are generated by images or concepts play a strong role in the matter. I am not saying that I am a propagandist of course[...]; however, as one who knows how propaganda works, I do what I can to not allow myself to be so caricatured by those who disagree with me. [Excerpt from Rerum Novarum (circa June 2, 2004)]
{12} Plus that I have not been affiliated with any political party for over a decade now explains my motivations in part with matters of a political nature.
{13} Proposing for Use and Future Definition the Terms "Rational Nominalism" and "Selective Rational Nominalism" (circa October 21, 2007)
{14} Defining the Term "Solipsism" -A Rerum Novarum Miscellaneous BLOG Post (circa February 7, 2004)
{15} I say "misappropriately called" because the term itself has a deeper concept that the presumption of applying it only to the modern age misses the forest for the trees on. (I may go over this another time if asked about it and if I am inclined to want to discuss it at the time but it is one of those factors under the surface which is of no small significance and yet rarely recognized as such -at least explicitly.)
{16} I will not claim to be without fault in this area myself at times in the past of course.
{17} As no one's philosophical. sociological, theological, political, or any other views exist in a vacuum, the foundational presuppositions that people operate from in seeking to perceive what is true can vary and sometimes quite dramatically.
{18} To really take it all down to brass tacks.
(Musings of your humble servant at Rerum Novarum)
[Prefatory Note: I decided to handle this matter in its own posting so it does not make my planned election commentary any longer than necessary.]
I have discussed this subject at sundry times and in divers manners in years gone by{1} and have decided the time has come to touch on the matter again. The circumstances are not exactly the same as some of the times I have explicitly{2} gone over this before but the value of timeless principles is that they are admitting of a variety of applications depending on changed circumstances.{3} For that reason, I want to precede the election commentary I am working on with a revisiting of the subject of language control to avoid having to quote large chunks of other postings in that commentary in the form of footnotes.{4}
To start with, I have as long as I can remember resisted being typecast by the many who have tried in one form or another. One reason for this is my views are not easy to categorize into any one "school of thought" in part because while there are degrees of systematization to how I view various issues; there is also a good degree of what could be called "cross-pollination" as a result of the amount of study I have done in my life on a panoply of subjects. But to it seems not a few people, something I have written or a view I would appear to concur with even if only in part is presumed to be my view. This kind of approach is more than a bit deceptive and persons who make such presumptions are thus inexorably wrong and often stunningly so. Or as I have said in a multiplicity of ways over the years including quite recently{5}: similarity is not the same as identity.
What does all of this have to do with "language control" is something probably crossing the minds of many who read these words. Well, for one thing, when you have the combination of seriously misunderstanding someones view coupled with the tendency most people have towards trying to find easy ways to categorize things, it can involve no small degree of miscategorization. And while this would not per se be a problem in and of itself, it can very well be if you also have in the mix those who try to define the terms of categorization in a way to give the impression that those so categorized should have their views{6} dismissed without fair consideration. This is the methodology of the propagandist after all. Any cursory reading of history should open one's eyes to the various ways people can have their humanity reduced in the eyes of others by means of varied forms of propaganda and this does not only apply to totalitarianist viewpoints of the most explicit and horrifying kind. It also applies to those who in a variety of ways fit the bill for what the late Senator Barry M. Goldwater called "those gentler collectivists who ask our permission to play God with the human race" though they do not often merely ask for such permissions anymore.{7}
Such persons will always find a foe in those such as your humble blog host who take seriously not only the concept of ideas but actual ideas themselves and recognize their power both in potentiality as well as actuality{8}, the importance of controlling the terms of identification if you will becomes in my mind pretty self-evident for those who ponder this matter syllogistically.
Or as has been noted on this weblog in years past in various ways{9} engineering of a social nature in whatever area one seeks to do it is always preceded by an engineering of a verbal nature. The reason for this is because in order to engineer things in actuality you first have to engineer them abstractly or in the realm of ideas for everything that is or ever will be starts with an idea. So if engineering requires precedence in the area of verbality before being manifested in actuality, then to fight the former with the greatest likelihood of success you must take a stand on the latter.
Because the moment we allow those who would seek to enslave us to coin their own terminology in reasonable sounding prose is the moment we give them the pretense of nobility for whatever nefarious scheme they are seeking to push onto us. Thus we get euthanasia promoted under terms such as "death with dignity", homosexual liaisons promoted by an attempted hijacking and redefinition of the term "marriage",{10} etc. -all of which provides the cultural wolves the cover of sheep's fleece to cloak themselves in to more easily hoodwink the unsuspecting masses. They want to control the terms of the battle because they can thereby put their opposition at a significant disadvantage positionally. And that is the first step towards putting their God-given rights at risk in reality; ergo they need to be fought positionally and on principles and not be allowed to set the terms for any debate.
This is why I have long said that I will not allow others to control the terms of any subject matter I am involved in{11} and my opposition at times can be pretty strident on this. Even if the subject involved may appear trivial to the casual observer, the underlying issue is where the matter of principle is with me my friends. Hence though the circumstances can differ, the principles behind my actions in a panoply of situations remain unchanged.
To give two examples of seemingly inconsequential subject matters, I was at one point quite strident in battling the attempt to typecast me as a writer of certain theological views characterized as "traditionalist" in nature. I have also steadfastly refused to allow people to caricature me as a Republican or in any way as a spokesman for the outgoing administration of whom I have had nearly as much disagreement with as agreement{12} over the years. Both of these do not seem significant but part of the reason was my concern to try and head off these matters in their most embryonic of stages before things developed further. And while on the former I have been quite successful, the latter has taken a bit more work and I am not so sure "victory" has been achieved there yet though the overall signs have been generally quite positive as I see them. But that is neither here nor there.
The principle I refer to in the above examples also extends to my reasons for demanding at times that users of certain buzzwords define said terms or cease using them altogether as "definitions are the tools of thought" (cf. M. Mentzer); ergo thought cannot be well cultivated in an environment where the words used are not given workable meanings. The failure to do this philosophically leads to what I call rational nominalism{13} which is a form of the epistemological fallacy of solipsism.{14} Theologically this principle manifests itself in what was once misappropriately called modernism.{15}
It also bears noting that often those opposed to a particular view will caricature it in a gross manner and those sympathetic often react to this by seeming to embrace and magnify the caricatured elements both of their own side as well as the other side. I do not and never have liked this kind of polemics{16} because it does not serve the cause of truth well however the latter is perceived by the parties in question.{17} And it does advertise well the lesser angels of our natures when those are the kinds of writings which get the most attention oftentimes to the detriment of ones where serious points of reference are put forward for potentially productive dialogue.
Yes in one sense it is a war of words but as I firmly believe that everything including our very existence as persons started with an idea{18}; ergo principles and ideas are of the utmost importance to me. People have fought for ideas and even died for them since the dawn of time. I do not feel therefore that ideas deserve to be treated as anything less than what they are which is merely the first points of contact with something that is of tremendous power potentially before it can be effectively realized in reality. That makes ideas quite powerful and therefore deserving of our respect in how they are interacted with -certainly a hell of a lot more respect than most people care to accord them in this day and age of increasing barbarity but I digress.
Notes:
{1} To note some stuff from the archives in past years in order from oldest to most recent pertaining to this subject:
On the Underlying Weltanschauung of Language Control (circa August 30, 2003)
On the Use of Labels -A Rerum Novarum Miscellaneous BLOG Posting (circa August 30, 2003)
On Workable Remedies for Society's Problems -Dialogue With Kevin Tierney (circa March 31, 2004)
[That] I recognize (for tactical or other reasons) certain exceptions is an indicator that there is no such thing as an immutable rule on these matters. There are however principles that construct my rule of discourse if you will and one of them is not ceding to opposing viewpoints the right to define the terms of dialogue. It might sound arrogant but I insist on defining those terms myself or (at the very least) relegating that to a stalemate in finding terms that each party can concur with. It sounds petty but propaganda is a matter of language and perceptions which are generated by images or concepts play a strong role in the matter. I am not saying that I am a propagandist of course[...]; however, as one who knows how propaganda works, I do what I can to not allow myself to be so caricatured by those who disagree with me. [Excerpt from Rerum Novarum (circa June 2, 2004)]
Since at least the point in 2004 where the above example was blogged up to the current posting, to my knowledge, all of the examples of my noting this principle in various subjects and circumstances on this weblog have come more from actual implementation of it rather than calling attention to it explicitly as was the case in the other links noted above.
{2} Rarely has it been discussed directly at this humble weblog but often it has been addressed in implicit or less recognizable ways.
{3} [A] subject as a rule needs to be of contemporary significance to be of interest to me in its discussing. This can take many forms including but not limited to (i) something that interests me that I have a reasonable degree of knowledge about which I may not have discussed before and want to discuss for some reason, (ii) that someone emails me on a subject previously discussed and I am predisposed for some reason to discuss it again at or approximate to that time, (iii) contemporary events which provide for the opportunity to in some fashion expound on timeless principles pertaining in some fashion or another to the subject so discussed, (iv) something I recall from reading which is of interest to me at a given moment in time, or (v) a situation whereby some additional threads can be added to the mosaic of subjects which have been of interest to me at various times as a way of further refining through development my views on a given subject matter. [Excerpt from Rerum Novarum (circa November 27, 2006)]
{4} I did promise brevity to the extent that would be possible of course which is part of what makes a posting like this an opportune one at the present time.
{5} On "Consequentialism", "Proportionalism", and a Lesson in General Norms of Interpretation, Theological or Otherwise (circa October 6, 2008)
{6} Or should I say, their views in the manner in which they have been often misrepresented by the one doing the categorizing thereof.
{7} No, they have gone from merely asking to do these things to trying through a variety of perversions of law and government to impose themselves onto others to deprive people of their fundamental God-given rights in the name of what they call "progress." As a fundamentally conservative person (but not a fundamentalist: again similarity is not the same as identity), I find this to be appalling but history proves the corruption that power oftentimes has in proportion to the amount it is possessed.
{8} [A]s far as I am concerned, arguing for a position on its intrinsic merits or lack thereof utilizing the tools of reason and logic is a serious business and far too many of a sophistic bent either do not realize this or they fail to take seriously the principle that ideas are serious things.
People have fought for ideas, they have died for ideas, and this has not only not changed in the present but these things still occur. Therefore, what someone is willing to involve themselves in (should they set foot into the arena of ideas) should be focused on primary or serious matters and not secondary or ancillary griping. [Excerpt from Rerum Novarum (circa June 28, 2006)]
{9} I for my part want nothing to do with this scuffling nor will I allow others to label me - even if they attempt to do so as a kind of "reference point" in a discussion.[...] Again, I either control the vernacular or we relegate it to a stalemate. The moment I as a rule allow others to do so[...] is the moment that I begin to give control of the arena to someone else. And that my friends is (i) not something I have ever done and (ii) it simply is not going to happen at any time in the future. [Excerpt from Rerum Novarum (circa August 30, 2003)]
{10} However, wherever, and whatever pretext one might use in defining this term, the variety of forms marriage has taken since the dawn of time have one constituent element to them that is the same: that marriage is between human beings of the opposite sex. To propose an application to this term of an arrangement that does not involve this constituent element is to do violence to the principle of words meaning things and with a concept that is the root and matrix of civilization itself.
{11} I have always recognized that at times concessions are required in this area, the underlying principle is to control the terms used in the arena of ideas as much as it is possible to do. Or as I noted to Charles de Nunzio when discussing this in the context of so-called homosexual "marriage" back in mid 2004:
[That] I recognize (for tactical or other reasons) certain exceptions is an indicator that there is no such thing as an immutable rule on these matters. There are however principles that construct my rule of discourse if you will and one of them is not ceding to opposing viewpoints the right to define the terms of dialogue. It might sound arrogant but I insist on defining those terms myself or (at the very least) relegating that to a stalemate in finding terms that each party can concur with. It sounds petty but propaganda is a matter of language and perceptions which are generated by images or concepts play a strong role in the matter. I am not saying that I am a propagandist of course[...]; however, as one who knows how propaganda works, I do what I can to not allow myself to be so caricatured by those who disagree with me. [Excerpt from Rerum Novarum (circa June 2, 2004)]
{12} Plus that I have not been affiliated with any political party for over a decade now explains my motivations in part with matters of a political nature.
{13} Proposing for Use and Future Definition the Terms "Rational Nominalism" and "Selective Rational Nominalism" (circa October 21, 2007)
{14} Defining the Term "Solipsism" -A Rerum Novarum Miscellaneous BLOG Post (circa February 7, 2004)
{15} I say "misappropriately called" because the term itself has a deeper concept that the presumption of applying it only to the modern age misses the forest for the trees on. (I may go over this another time if asked about it and if I am inclined to want to discuss it at the time but it is one of those factors under the surface which is of no small significance and yet rarely recognized as such -at least explicitly.)
{16} I will not claim to be without fault in this area myself at times in the past of course.
{17} As no one's philosophical. sociological, theological, political, or any other views exist in a vacuum, the foundational presuppositions that people operate from in seeking to perceive what is true can vary and sometimes quite dramatically.
{18} To really take it all down to brass tacks.
Sunday, November 23, 2008
Tuesday, November 18, 2008
In line with the recent musings on poetry and my intention to manifest that side of me more on this humble weblog, here is one of the eight line stanzas I wrote in recent months using the last line of some one else's stanza as the first of my own. Without further ado...
the world is lazy, we can take what we seek
the law of the jungle no friend of the meek
when ethics are slack the strong plunder the weak
in a variety of ways
optimistic football year
the source of many a tear
the Hawks more laughed at than feared
bring on 2009. [Written on 10/16/08]
the world is lazy, we can take what we seek
the law of the jungle no friend of the meek
when ethics are slack the strong plunder the weak
in a variety of ways
optimistic football year
the source of many a tear
the Hawks more laughed at than feared
bring on 2009. [Written on 10/16/08]
Having written on the subject of poetry yesterday, I can now turn to this posting which was intended for then but now can be more adequately tended to in light of that writing. The following is a song from The Band on their second album circa 1969 -an album I reviewed here for those who are interested. I post it today as I have had my late father (may he rest in peace) in mind who was himself a union man for most of his working life. Without further ado...
King Harvest:
Corn in the fields.
Listen to the rice when the wind blows 'cross the water,
King Harvest has surely come.
I work for the union 'cause she's so good to me;
And I'm bound to come out on top,
That's where I should be.
I will hear ev'ry word the boss may say,
For he's the one who hands me down my pay.
Looks like this time I'm gonna get to stay,
I'm a union man, now, all the way.
The smell of the leaves,
From the magnolia trees in the meadow,
King Harvest has surely come.
Dry summer, then comes fall,
Which I depend on most of all.
Hey, rainmaker, can't you hear my call?
Please let these crops grow tall.
Long enough I've been up on skid row
And it's plain to see, I've nothin to show.
I'm glad to pay those union dues,
Just don't judge me by my shoes.
Scarecrow and a yellow moon,
And pretty soon a carnival on the edge of town,
King Harvest has surely come.
Last year, this time, wasn't no joke,
My whole barn went up in smoke.
My horse Jethro, well he went mad
And I can't remember things bein' so bad.
Then there comes a man with a paper and a pen
Tellin' us our hard times are about to end.
And then, if they don't give us what we like
He said, "men, that's when you gotta go on strike."
Corn in the fields.
Listen to the rice when the wind blows 'cross the water,
King Harvest has surely come. [J. R. Robertson]
King Harvest:
Corn in the fields.
Listen to the rice when the wind blows 'cross the water,
King Harvest has surely come.
I work for the union 'cause she's so good to me;
And I'm bound to come out on top,
That's where I should be.
I will hear ev'ry word the boss may say,
For he's the one who hands me down my pay.
Looks like this time I'm gonna get to stay,
I'm a union man, now, all the way.
The smell of the leaves,
From the magnolia trees in the meadow,
King Harvest has surely come.
Dry summer, then comes fall,
Which I depend on most of all.
Hey, rainmaker, can't you hear my call?
Please let these crops grow tall.
Long enough I've been up on skid row
And it's plain to see, I've nothin to show.
I'm glad to pay those union dues,
Just don't judge me by my shoes.
Scarecrow and a yellow moon,
And pretty soon a carnival on the edge of town,
King Harvest has surely come.
Last year, this time, wasn't no joke,
My whole barn went up in smoke.
My horse Jethro, well he went mad
And I can't remember things bein' so bad.
Then there comes a man with a paper and a pen
Tellin' us our hard times are about to end.
And then, if they don't give us what we like
He said, "men, that's when you gotta go on strike."
Corn in the fields.
Listen to the rice when the wind blows 'cross the water,
King Harvest has surely come. [J. R. Robertson]
Sunday, November 16, 2008
On Poetry and Lyrics:
(Musings of your humble servant at Rerum Novarum)
It is customary to post some poetry and lyrics at times to this site as my mood to do so presents itself. However, the past year has seen next to none of that by my own admission -something I realized when doing a check on the matter when preparing to post some lyrical poetry today from The Band. That will now be postponed{1} as I muse a bit on this facet to my personality which like some others has seen scant if any mention on the weblog over the years.
I have so many sides to my being and poems and poetry (and the enjoyment of them) is one of them. However, this is a side of me that while I started to manifest it a bit on the weblog with the intention of further cultivation has nonetheless in recent years (for a variety of reasons) not happened. Last year was an exception to that pattern though -indeed, I was pleased in reviewing the archives to see that 2007 had a moderate degree of posts pertaining to poetry and lyric related matters{2}: more than any year since 2003.{3}
I did not realize this until I did a quick search of the archival tags for lyrics/poetry and lyrics/poetry/musings in preparing a lyrical post for publishing that this year had been so sparse in that area.{4} And when you omit one which has become a tradition at this weblog every year{5} that makes 2008 that much bleaker still not to mention every year since 2004.{6}
So something that started off solid and carried fairly decently into the second year of blogging really started tailing off in 2004 when the number of poetry and lyric postings fell to six, 2005 when it fell to five, and 2006 which likewise had five such postings. And when you consider that most of the forty-seven odd postings in these categorizations over the years have not been my own poetry{7}, that makes the matter even more interesting to ponder on the part of yours truly.
Now of course it is not necessary that such things be my own creation -I certainly do not possess this gift to the extent of many others by my own admission.{8} However, I have this year made a conscious effort to write more poetry -not only haikus but also some eight line rhyming stanza poems which is a new area for me. Indeed, I have written about two hundred haikus this year -many of which were in formats where I had to use someone else's last line as my first line which makes them a bit harder to whip out in traditional poetic haiku form (which I follow meticulously by the way) than if I do so completely on my own from scratch.{9}
As for why the poetry and lyrical postings have been less in recent years, I am sure to no small measure it was due to the election season of 2004 and various other factors in the subsequent years which were not helped by my noticeably greater focus on geopolitical subject matter since late 2003 on this humble weblog.{10}
But as was noted already, I have this year written a mess of haikus and even some stanza poetry of the sort I have not done in longer than I can remember. Many of this year's compositions will find their way onto the blog in the coming year at various intervals I am sure along with contributions from others in this area. But this is definitely an area I want to give renewed focus to for the duration of this year and into 2009 and beyond; ergo, I will do so.
Notes:
{1} For to explain this detracts from that posting so it will be put up in the coming days as I originally planned to do today before getting in the mood to muse on the subject of poetry in general as I have done here.
{2} There were eight such postings from 2007.
{3} Numerically 2003 was the best year but by ratio, it was unquestionably 2002. For while there were ten such postings in all of 2003, there were eight in the last four months of 2002: the only months we were blogging that year.
{4} Thus far, there have been two such postings in 2008.
{5} I refer here to what has become the traditional Auld Lang Syne posting to start every year which debuted in January of 2004 and starting with January of 2005 has been posted to start every year since with the exception of 2006 when it was posted on New Years Eve 2005 due to extraordinary circumstances of the time. (Starting with 2007, the January pattern was resumed in this regard and this was carried through to the present year.) As is our wont, things start off at times as intuitions that we end up analyzing later on and this was no different. Ergo, in some expository musings posted on New Years Eve 2007, we explained how the original intuition had crystallized over the years in our mind to become more than a mere whimsical gesture but instead had far deeper meanings. For those who are interested, those musings can be viewed here.
{6} For while none of the eight from 2002 or ten from 2003 included this posting, all years starting with 2004 have. (And if this is taken to account, that makes the poetry/lyrics postings from those years even fewer than they already were -particularly 2005 which had two postings of this sort with the second being posted to ring in 2006 on New Years Eve that year.)
{7} Of self-composed pieces there were two posted in 2002, one in 2004, one in 2005, and two in 2007.
{8} Such as Robert Frost (a favourite poet of mine), William Shakespeare, AE Housman, and more contemporarily: my friend Albert Cipriani. (A few of whose poems have been blogged to this weblog over the years with I am sure more to come.)
{9} The same using another person's first line approach was used with the eight line stanzas of which I have written about a dozen of them so far with the most recent one being composed today.
{10} This was not the stark departure that many presumed but instead a return to the sort of postings to discussion boards I used to do both on the web and in other ways long before I wrote any web essays or involved myself so much in theological subject.The latter pattern from 2000-2003 being the novelty rather than the converse as I noted in late 2006 when my friend Apolonio expressed concern about it in a dialogue that I blogged to this weblog in September of 2006. (The correspondence was originally from November 2005 and slightly tweaked to make the response relevant to September 2006 when the material was eventually blogged.)
(Musings of your humble servant at Rerum Novarum)
It is customary to post some poetry and lyrics at times to this site as my mood to do so presents itself. However, the past year has seen next to none of that by my own admission -something I realized when doing a check on the matter when preparing to post some lyrical poetry today from The Band. That will now be postponed{1} as I muse a bit on this facet to my personality which like some others has seen scant if any mention on the weblog over the years.
I have so many sides to my being and poems and poetry (and the enjoyment of them) is one of them. However, this is a side of me that while I started to manifest it a bit on the weblog with the intention of further cultivation has nonetheless in recent years (for a variety of reasons) not happened. Last year was an exception to that pattern though -indeed, I was pleased in reviewing the archives to see that 2007 had a moderate degree of posts pertaining to poetry and lyric related matters{2}: more than any year since 2003.{3}
I did not realize this until I did a quick search of the archival tags for lyrics/poetry and lyrics/poetry/musings in preparing a lyrical post for publishing that this year had been so sparse in that area.{4} And when you omit one which has become a tradition at this weblog every year{5} that makes 2008 that much bleaker still not to mention every year since 2004.{6}
So something that started off solid and carried fairly decently into the second year of blogging really started tailing off in 2004 when the number of poetry and lyric postings fell to six, 2005 when it fell to five, and 2006 which likewise had five such postings. And when you consider that most of the forty-seven odd postings in these categorizations over the years have not been my own poetry{7}, that makes the matter even more interesting to ponder on the part of yours truly.
Now of course it is not necessary that such things be my own creation -I certainly do not possess this gift to the extent of many others by my own admission.{8} However, I have this year made a conscious effort to write more poetry -not only haikus but also some eight line rhyming stanza poems which is a new area for me. Indeed, I have written about two hundred haikus this year -many of which were in formats where I had to use someone else's last line as my first line which makes them a bit harder to whip out in traditional poetic haiku form (which I follow meticulously by the way) than if I do so completely on my own from scratch.{9}
As for why the poetry and lyrical postings have been less in recent years, I am sure to no small measure it was due to the election season of 2004 and various other factors in the subsequent years which were not helped by my noticeably greater focus on geopolitical subject matter since late 2003 on this humble weblog.{10}
But as was noted already, I have this year written a mess of haikus and even some stanza poetry of the sort I have not done in longer than I can remember. Many of this year's compositions will find their way onto the blog in the coming year at various intervals I am sure along with contributions from others in this area. But this is definitely an area I want to give renewed focus to for the duration of this year and into 2009 and beyond; ergo, I will do so.
Notes:
{1} For to explain this detracts from that posting so it will be put up in the coming days as I originally planned to do today before getting in the mood to muse on the subject of poetry in general as I have done here.
{2} There were eight such postings from 2007.
{3} Numerically 2003 was the best year but by ratio, it was unquestionably 2002. For while there were ten such postings in all of 2003, there were eight in the last four months of 2002: the only months we were blogging that year.
{4} Thus far, there have been two such postings in 2008.
{5} I refer here to what has become the traditional Auld Lang Syne posting to start every year which debuted in January of 2004 and starting with January of 2005 has been posted to start every year since with the exception of 2006 when it was posted on New Years Eve 2005 due to extraordinary circumstances of the time. (Starting with 2007, the January pattern was resumed in this regard and this was carried through to the present year.) As is our wont, things start off at times as intuitions that we end up analyzing later on and this was no different. Ergo, in some expository musings posted on New Years Eve 2007, we explained how the original intuition had crystallized over the years in our mind to become more than a mere whimsical gesture but instead had far deeper meanings. For those who are interested, those musings can be viewed here.
{6} For while none of the eight from 2002 or ten from 2003 included this posting, all years starting with 2004 have. (And if this is taken to account, that makes the poetry/lyrics postings from those years even fewer than they already were -particularly 2005 which had two postings of this sort with the second being posted to ring in 2006 on New Years Eve that year.)
{7} Of self-composed pieces there were two posted in 2002, one in 2004, one in 2005, and two in 2007.
{8} Such as Robert Frost (a favourite poet of mine), William Shakespeare, AE Housman, and more contemporarily: my friend Albert Cipriani. (A few of whose poems have been blogged to this weblog over the years with I am sure more to come.)
{9} The same using another person's first line approach was used with the eight line stanzas of which I have written about a dozen of them so far with the most recent one being composed today.
{10} This was not the stark departure that many presumed but instead a return to the sort of postings to discussion boards I used to do both on the web and in other ways long before I wrote any web essays or involved myself so much in theological subject.The latter pattern from 2000-2003 being the novelty rather than the converse as I noted in late 2006 when my friend Apolonio expressed concern about it in a dialogue that I blogged to this weblog in September of 2006. (The correspondence was originally from November 2005 and slightly tweaked to make the response relevant to September 2006 when the material was eventually blogged.)
Friday, November 14, 2008
Miscellaneous Musings:
It seems appropriate to note before the tide of the msm orgasms about how thanks to the election that we are about to be "led out of Egypt" and to a "land flowing with milk and honey" precisely what sort of failed policies have been promoted under the banner of "change." One is the idea of another "New Deal" under the rubric that the first one actually saved the country from the Great Depression when in fact it made matters much worse and turned a recession into a depression that it took the Second World War to extricate us from.{1} This is something we have spoken of before on this weblog at sundry times and in divers manners but it bears reiterating anew at this time. Ergo, we will do so with some examples from the archives before moving on so here goes in order from oldest to newest:
The myth of liberals that FDR's "New Deal" took us out of the Depression continues I see.[...] The truth is, the "New Deal" prolonged the depression as a result of FDR not having a coherent economic plan but instead trying a hodgepodge of things which were often contradictory -this is not difficult to demonstrate if not for wanting to avoid writing a tome on the matter and getting a laugh out of Kevin in the process. (Due to a reputation I have for expository cogitations that he is aware of.) [Excerpt from Rerum Novarum (circa October 3, 2008)]
The solution is not federalizing things as that always has historically made things worse. (Such as the New Deal prolonging the Depression which we only went out of by going to war and ramping up military production.) The solution is letting the market work and not trying to coerce it -including not trying to force banks to lend to people who are high credit risks at the risk of federal lawsuits. That is after all how we got into this mess to begin with. [Excerpt from Rerum Novarum (circa October 1, 2008) ]
That is why after the depression deepened in 1937 that The New Deal gang was strongly rebuked in the election of 1938 presumably??? (Look it up, this is not even debatable.) And as the above comment is mere wishful thinking and does not reflect what actually happened; no more needs to be said about it at this time...
Of course the efficacy of the programs created is merely presumed by the author but they do not bother trying to substantiate it. This is what happens when people buy into a myth and there is a lot of mythology surrounding the presidency of Franklin D. Roosevelt. [Excerpt from Rerum Novarum (circa October 28, 2006)]
In case any of the readers are wondering what We at Rerum Novarum happen to think about this very unconventional thesis; for the record your humble servant has not a shred of doubt that it is correct - conventional wisdom be damned. Indeed I have made the argument many times in political discussions that on the whole the New Deal prolonged and made worse the Great Depression.
This created a "need" to go to war to fix the problem via the industrial activity required to rebuild and rearm a nation whose military equipment had become run down and (in some cases) rather obsolete. Obviously this is a very simplistic outline of a rather complex subject but I submit that it is true to form and perhaps sometime I can explain my reasons for seeing things this way. [Excerpt from Rerum Novarum (circa April 22, 2003)]
[H]ow many people like my late grandmother were depression era strugglers who thought that FDR and the Devilcrats ...er... Democrats were their economic saviours??? More than we will know but people of those generations are passing away or some of them are wising up to it now. [Excerpt from Rerum Novarum (circa November 6, 2002)]
Along the same theme as massive government intervention in the economy is massive government intervention in health care which will inexorably have the same result as proven by experience in nations where this is the practice amply demonstrates.{2} Having touched on those matters briefly, I want to focus on one more thing and reiterate a principle we have long followed at this humble weblog. For one thing, the rush of many to report on anything they can in order to try and "scoop a story" is something I almost never have done and with good reason. Or as I noted over five years ago when touching on this principle in another context:
For my part, being ahead of the curve in my commentary on issues is a delicacy kinda like a pre-Castro Montecristo or a bottle of Chateau '61 - though not that rare of course...But anyway, this is a delicacy my friends, an exception to our normal protocol.
That is correct gentle readers, you read just what you thought you did. While many blogs may claim to be the next "Woodward and Bernstein", We at Rerum Novarum are not among them. For you see, We prefer to generally let others take the bounding steps forward to be skewered by arrows...Essentially this normative policy means that we can sit back, watch others drop with arrows sticking out of every orifice, and solemnly intone a "there are Indians that way" proclamation.[...] Usually this means we will not be ahead of the curve...
The benefits are (i) there is greater longevity (ii) it allows for better overall musings (iii) we seldom err in our predictions and (iv) I cannot think of a fourth or subsequent advantage offhand. [Excerpt from Rerum Novarum (circa August 28, 2003)]
And the reason for this approach was noted in another posting linked to the above one but omitted from the referenced quote to avoid unnecessary repetition. But here it is for those who are interested:
[T]here is a reason that you will seldom see breaking stories at this humble weblog.[...]
I tend to prefer to let others bring up breaking issues and then I respond to them. There are tactical reasons for this as well as practical ones. Part of the reason is that I am too critical of journalism in general of rushing to print anything they think can make a story and then if they err on A1 - which happens more frequently than most people would believe, they correct themselves on Q14 where no one sees it.[...]
I find if I let others break the story, I can benefit from their efforts and also circumvent the problems that can come with seeking to "break" a story before anyone else. And of course letting others hash out the main points provides an opportunity to approach the subjects in a way that is to some degree different than anyone else. [Excerpt from Rerum Novarum (circa June 11, 2003)]
Now with many who are not concerned because they gamble either on the distractions of a 24/7 media cycle and/or the short memories of others, they can make these sorts of leaps all they want but it affects their overall credibility as far as we are concerned. And perhaps no example of recent vintage illustrates this as well as the claim that even FOXNews fell prey to about a supposed "unnamed McCain campaign staffer" who was purported to have said that Gov. Sarah Palin did not know that Africa was a continent. I knew the moment I heard it that the whole thing was a pile of horseshit yet look at how the msm and many bloggers from the self-identified "progressive" side of things jumped on that one and broadcast it far and wide.
As I said already, I knew it was horseshit from the get-go and it is nice to see The New York Times expose this hoax for what it was -even if the exposure took place after the election. It is better late than never of course but let this serve as a lesson to those who are too quick to believe whatever is reported in the msm without stepping back and engaging in a bit of critical discernment first.
And finally, as far as the previously mentioned commentary on the election results and manifested trends, I am working on it bit by bit and anticipate it will be posted before November 21st as of this writing -hopefully as soon as November 17th. I have realized though before that can be done a concept we have covered directly and indirectly over the years needs to be revisited first if that commentary is to be kept to the reasonable length to which I hope to keep it as we have previously promised. (And that posting will be put up at some point in the next two days time-willing.)
Notes:
{1} Five Myths About the Great Depression (Andrew Wilson)
{2} Public Health Insurance under a Nonbenevolent State (Pierre Lemieux)
It seems appropriate to note before the tide of the msm orgasms about how thanks to the election that we are about to be "led out of Egypt" and to a "land flowing with milk and honey" precisely what sort of failed policies have been promoted under the banner of "change." One is the idea of another "New Deal" under the rubric that the first one actually saved the country from the Great Depression when in fact it made matters much worse and turned a recession into a depression that it took the Second World War to extricate us from.{1} This is something we have spoken of before on this weblog at sundry times and in divers manners but it bears reiterating anew at this time. Ergo, we will do so with some examples from the archives before moving on so here goes in order from oldest to newest:
The myth of liberals that FDR's "New Deal" took us out of the Depression continues I see.[...] The truth is, the "New Deal" prolonged the depression as a result of FDR not having a coherent economic plan but instead trying a hodgepodge of things which were often contradictory -this is not difficult to demonstrate if not for wanting to avoid writing a tome on the matter and getting a laugh out of Kevin in the process. (Due to a reputation I have for expository cogitations that he is aware of.) [Excerpt from Rerum Novarum (circa October 3, 2008)]
The solution is not federalizing things as that always has historically made things worse. (Such as the New Deal prolonging the Depression which we only went out of by going to war and ramping up military production.) The solution is letting the market work and not trying to coerce it -including not trying to force banks to lend to people who are high credit risks at the risk of federal lawsuits. That is after all how we got into this mess to begin with. [Excerpt from Rerum Novarum (circa October 1, 2008) ]
That is why after the depression deepened in 1937 that The New Deal gang was strongly rebuked in the election of 1938 presumably??? (Look it up, this is not even debatable.) And as the above comment is mere wishful thinking and does not reflect what actually happened; no more needs to be said about it at this time...
Of course the efficacy of the programs created is merely presumed by the author but they do not bother trying to substantiate it. This is what happens when people buy into a myth and there is a lot of mythology surrounding the presidency of Franklin D. Roosevelt. [Excerpt from Rerum Novarum (circa October 28, 2006)]
In case any of the readers are wondering what We at Rerum Novarum happen to think about this very unconventional thesis; for the record your humble servant has not a shred of doubt that it is correct - conventional wisdom be damned. Indeed I have made the argument many times in political discussions that on the whole the New Deal prolonged and made worse the Great Depression.
This created a "need" to go to war to fix the problem via the industrial activity required to rebuild and rearm a nation whose military equipment had become run down and (in some cases) rather obsolete. Obviously this is a very simplistic outline of a rather complex subject but I submit that it is true to form and perhaps sometime I can explain my reasons for seeing things this way. [Excerpt from Rerum Novarum (circa April 22, 2003)]
[H]ow many people like my late grandmother were depression era strugglers who thought that FDR and the Devilcrats ...er... Democrats were their economic saviours??? More than we will know but people of those generations are passing away or some of them are wising up to it now. [Excerpt from Rerum Novarum (circa November 6, 2002)]
Along the same theme as massive government intervention in the economy is massive government intervention in health care which will inexorably have the same result as proven by experience in nations where this is the practice amply demonstrates.{2} Having touched on those matters briefly, I want to focus on one more thing and reiterate a principle we have long followed at this humble weblog. For one thing, the rush of many to report on anything they can in order to try and "scoop a story" is something I almost never have done and with good reason. Or as I noted over five years ago when touching on this principle in another context:
For my part, being ahead of the curve in my commentary on issues is a delicacy kinda like a pre-Castro Montecristo or a bottle of Chateau '61 - though not that rare of course...But anyway, this is a delicacy my friends, an exception to our normal protocol.
That is correct gentle readers, you read just what you thought you did. While many blogs may claim to be the next "Woodward and Bernstein", We at Rerum Novarum are not among them. For you see, We prefer to generally let others take the bounding steps forward to be skewered by arrows...Essentially this normative policy means that we can sit back, watch others drop with arrows sticking out of every orifice, and solemnly intone a "there are Indians that way" proclamation.[...] Usually this means we will not be ahead of the curve...
The benefits are (i) there is greater longevity (ii) it allows for better overall musings (iii) we seldom err in our predictions and (iv) I cannot think of a fourth or subsequent advantage offhand. [Excerpt from Rerum Novarum (circa August 28, 2003)]
And the reason for this approach was noted in another posting linked to the above one but omitted from the referenced quote to avoid unnecessary repetition. But here it is for those who are interested:
[T]here is a reason that you will seldom see breaking stories at this humble weblog.[...]
I tend to prefer to let others bring up breaking issues and then I respond to them. There are tactical reasons for this as well as practical ones. Part of the reason is that I am too critical of journalism in general of rushing to print anything they think can make a story and then if they err on A1 - which happens more frequently than most people would believe, they correct themselves on Q14 where no one sees it.[...]
I find if I let others break the story, I can benefit from their efforts and also circumvent the problems that can come with seeking to "break" a story before anyone else. And of course letting others hash out the main points provides an opportunity to approach the subjects in a way that is to some degree different than anyone else. [Excerpt from Rerum Novarum (circa June 11, 2003)]
Now with many who are not concerned because they gamble either on the distractions of a 24/7 media cycle and/or the short memories of others, they can make these sorts of leaps all they want but it affects their overall credibility as far as we are concerned. And perhaps no example of recent vintage illustrates this as well as the claim that even FOXNews fell prey to about a supposed "unnamed McCain campaign staffer" who was purported to have said that Gov. Sarah Palin did not know that Africa was a continent. I knew the moment I heard it that the whole thing was a pile of horseshit yet look at how the msm and many bloggers from the self-identified "progressive" side of things jumped on that one and broadcast it far and wide.
As I said already, I knew it was horseshit from the get-go and it is nice to see The New York Times expose this hoax for what it was -even if the exposure took place after the election. It is better late than never of course but let this serve as a lesson to those who are too quick to believe whatever is reported in the msm without stepping back and engaging in a bit of critical discernment first.
And finally, as far as the previously mentioned commentary on the election results and manifested trends, I am working on it bit by bit and anticipate it will be posted before November 21st as of this writing -hopefully as soon as November 17th. I have realized though before that can be done a concept we have covered directly and indirectly over the years needs to be revisited first if that commentary is to be kept to the reasonable length to which I hope to keep it as we have previously promised. (And that posting will be put up at some point in the next two days time-willing.)
Notes:
{1} Five Myths About the Great Depression (Andrew Wilson)
{2} Public Health Insurance under a Nonbenevolent State (Pierre Lemieux)
Thursday, November 13, 2008
The Treatment of Bush Has Been a Disgrace (Jeffrey Scott Shapiro)
Though there are plenty of legitimate criticisms that can be made against the manner in which President George W. Bush and his administration handled various issues, at the same time, it is also undeniable that the outgoing president has been handled overall by not a few persons in the media and elsewhere quite disgracefully. For that reason, we at Rerum Novarum recommend the above article which was written by someone who was affiliated with the Kerry campaign in 2004.
Though there are plenty of legitimate criticisms that can be made against the manner in which President George W. Bush and his administration handled various issues, at the same time, it is also undeniable that the outgoing president has been handled overall by not a few persons in the media and elsewhere quite disgracefully. For that reason, we at Rerum Novarum recommend the above article which was written by someone who was affiliated with the Kerry campaign in 2004.
Sunday, November 09, 2008
Points to Ponder:
You cannot survive if you do not know the past. We know why all the other civilizations have collapsed--from an excess of welfare, of richness, and from lack of morality, of spirituality...The moment you give up your principles, and your values . . . the moment you laugh at those principles, and those values, you are dead, your culture is dead, your civilization is dead. Period." [Oriana Fallaci]
You cannot survive if you do not know the past. We know why all the other civilizations have collapsed--from an excess of welfare, of richness, and from lack of morality, of spirituality...The moment you give up your principles, and your values . . . the moment you laugh at those principles, and those values, you are dead, your culture is dead, your civilization is dead. Period." [Oriana Fallaci]
Friday, November 07, 2008
Wednesday, November 05, 2008
Ultrabriefly on the Election Results:
I intend to write an analysis of the election trends of 2008 in a post-election commentary to be published sometime later this month. However, at the moment I am mulling over how I want to approach this. The intention is to try to make this commentary shorter than past election commentaries have been but without sacrificing essential points that need to be covered.
I do not intend prior to the publishing of that commentary to say anything about the election unless it is a response to reader email.{1} Furthermore, even after that commentary is published through at least the final months of President Bush's term that is how I intend to approach this matter. It is also with that commentary that I will debut a new blog tag for the president-elect{2} befitting the new station to which he will be ascending and which will be used for all postings pertaining to him after the inauguration.
The more I ponder these matters, the more I conclude that I am probably not of the same mindset on this matter that many who would identify themselves as "conservatives" may be. But that is par for the course I suppose -my approach to these matters is one that recognizes the whole panorama of conservative views rather than one narrow school of thought that is prevalent today. Nonetheless, the commentary will explain this to some extent and I will at that point not discuss election related issues until after January 20, 2009.{3} For a long election campaign has been concluded and battles that will need to be fought starting at that time{4} require one to conserve their energies on these matters.
Notes:
{1} And that is assuming that I even bother to respond to reader email on this subject of course should any be forthcoming. (It is still quite early in the aftermath.)
{2} Who shall likely not be mentioned at this weblog until that time.
{3} The one exception to this pledge is that I may comment further if somehow Dino Rossi wins the governors race for the second time between now and when that commentary is completed and published.
{4} I may however in that interim and as time allows for it sketch out a rough draft of the second of two initiative ideas I want to get on the ballot for Washington State in the 2010 election. (The first idea was sketched out nearly five years ago on this humble weblog and may be revisited again in the interim prior to the election as well.)
I intend to write an analysis of the election trends of 2008 in a post-election commentary to be published sometime later this month. However, at the moment I am mulling over how I want to approach this. The intention is to try to make this commentary shorter than past election commentaries have been but without sacrificing essential points that need to be covered.
I do not intend prior to the publishing of that commentary to say anything about the election unless it is a response to reader email.{1} Furthermore, even after that commentary is published through at least the final months of President Bush's term that is how I intend to approach this matter. It is also with that commentary that I will debut a new blog tag for the president-elect{2} befitting the new station to which he will be ascending and which will be used for all postings pertaining to him after the inauguration.
The more I ponder these matters, the more I conclude that I am probably not of the same mindset on this matter that many who would identify themselves as "conservatives" may be. But that is par for the course I suppose -my approach to these matters is one that recognizes the whole panorama of conservative views rather than one narrow school of thought that is prevalent today. Nonetheless, the commentary will explain this to some extent and I will at that point not discuss election related issues until after January 20, 2009.{3} For a long election campaign has been concluded and battles that will need to be fought starting at that time{4} require one to conserve their energies on these matters.
Notes:
{1} And that is assuming that I even bother to respond to reader email on this subject of course should any be forthcoming. (It is still quite early in the aftermath.)
{2} Who shall likely not be mentioned at this weblog until that time.
{3} The one exception to this pledge is that I may comment further if somehow Dino Rossi wins the governors race for the second time between now and when that commentary is completed and published.
{4} I may however in that interim and as time allows for it sketch out a rough draft of the second of two initiative ideas I want to get on the ballot for Washington State in the 2010 election. (The first idea was sketched out nearly five years ago on this humble weblog and may be revisited again in the interim prior to the election as well.)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)