Moonlapse

I know he owns the Washington Times, and I know he's chummy with some top conservatives, but I don't understand the 'infestation'. Can you elaborate? BTW, I won't defend all things libertarian, only what I believe for myself. The label itself, like all other labels, encompasses its share of idiots. Though the ideology is essentially similar mine, I believe actions are louder than words.

I still don't get the Moonies and Washington Times...

Thats ridiculous. Polynesians, yes. Australians, no. The vast majority of Australia is very inhospitable place and certainly could not support a civilization that could travel to the Americas. Polynesians populated New Zealand.

I saw King Crimson about some years ago at Red Rocks, it was great.

Actually it was the Moonies and the Washington Times that threw me off.

I have to admit, I'm confused.

My own favorites would be Michael Akerfeldt or Jimmy Page... not to say that they are the best, but that their work is the most appealing to me.

Not as much anymore, but I did when I was learning to play guitar. I also like the Yardbirds and the Hollies.

I have paternal lineage to a man named Michael Du Bois, born in Middlesex around 1585.

You consider me a socialist? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libertarianism Yes, the snow made me extremely happy because it gave me an automatic Christmas vacation.

I think the number of people who do believe it is much more than is obvious.

Depends on what kind of music you like. Ever listen to Al Green or Marvin Gaye? I'm partial to Parabola by Tool.

A Christmas essay from Orwell, whom I find an absolute pleasure to read, written exactly 63 years ago. http://www.online-literature.com/orwell/895/

I'm just saying that I think the current overall situation is a result of that mindset. I apologize for being ambiguous. I actually can't think of any recent presidents that are an exception. Some people hate Bush and love Clinton, or vice versa, which I don't really understand unless I disregard actions and focus on party names.

I was practically coerced into thinking up crap gifts since there's nothing that I want, aside from some prohibitively costly computer upgrades, a pack of generic t-shirts and to be my own employer.

There is a fundamental belief that we are 'right'. They are evil. We are supremely justified to intervene for the good of the whole world, because we are right, and anyone who tries to limit us is corrupted. You can't let people decide their own fates, because people are stupid and those who distrust authority are nuts. Everything must be predictable and quantifiable so that it can be managed. By control and management a system can be created that is perfect according to those who created it. If you are discontent, something is wrong with you. Opposition is evil and it must be crushed.

Depends on who they make friends with.

My avatar used to be an obtuse septagram. I like it because the angles are odd and the shape is more circular without losing its starry look.

I'd say that Nicaragua was 'raped' far worse than Mexico ever was.

Things always die down a bit around the holidays.

That raises the question of whether or not is it the rightful duty of the ruling political party to determine what is best for other countries and to implement this 'righteousness' with the use of military force. Despite the perceived drawbacks of non-intervention, I personally think that intervention is a much more destructive policy in the long run, especially preemptive. However, it's also good to remember that the Colonies did not fight off the British without aid. I usually try to put these things in a smaller perspective, such as considering neighbors with differing ideologies. It it correct for a non-disciplinarian family to forcefully intervene in the matters of a disciplinarian family with disregard to established laws? Theres a lot of factors that come into play, but I think violence (use of force) should be an absolute last resort. Anyways, I'm drifting a little off-topic.

Wouldn't that instead be a dominant global influence instead of a territorial empire? The US may have a considerable amount of clients, sometimes introduced or sustained by force, but calling it an empire is a blurring of terminology (at least, by what I consider to be a classic definition of empire). Would you consider the Soviet Union to have been an empire that included Cuba, North Korea, etc? "Empire ought not be conflated with imperialism. The former is a structure, the latter is a policy." Also, if the US supported Saddam Hussein militarily in his rise to power, would that not have made Iraq part of a US empire, and if so, wouldn't the current war be considered an internal police action instead? If Puerto Rico required a police action, would it be called a war, and would the US have to disregard international law in order to act?

Where to start? I haven't been terribly active here lately, though I do check in roughly once a day. Interest in specifically Roman things has waned a bit an I find that I have less to contribute than normal, if that is possible I'm inescapably trapped in fervent book reading for the moment, to the point that any moment when I cannot read (any time that I'm driving) I'm engrossed in podcasts of academic lectures. I've put a link to some of these in the block to the right. I'm currently listening to the ECON 210 class at Purdue and despite taking weeks worth of lectures to explain a page or two's worth of ideas in terms of cookies and pancakes, I do find it very interesting. I find my new job almost excruciatingly boring and I'm freaked out by how much the jargon resembles Newspeak. The money I'm making is convenient, though it oddly gives me no satisfaction and I constantly think about how I can use it to create a different way to support myself and how long it will take to save up that initial investment sum, whatever it amounts to. I'll break out of this funk soon enough, and at least I'll have learned something from it. In the meantime, I'll just enjoy this bottle of beer and the always stimulating discourse of the members here. Oh yeah, I have jury duty tomorrow, wee!!! And I found out that I'm haplogroup H(mtDNA) on my mother's side and haplogroup R1b(Y) on my father's side.

I'm reading 'Hegemony or Survival' by Noam Chomsky and I find it incredibly relevant to this topic. Anyways, speaking of lessons learned, I hope that people learn that simply being cynical about the misuse of global dominance won't change a damn thing.

How about we just ban discretion altogether and get it over with? Eliminate any choices or information that might be ungood, under the penalty of law, and we can all become like empty vessels filled to the brim with goodness.