Endless war, brought to you by popular acclaim

"Doesn't everyone believe that war should be a last resort? Supporters of the US' action in invading Iraq believe it too, so they have to persuade themselves that it was indeed a last resort. Of course those of us with a clue and who can read and think know that they're deluded (some wilfully so) .... "

Read more from Frankis (scroll down the page) writing at John Quiggins' blog. Update: also cross-posted at Crooked Timber (scroll way down).

On karma

Natalie Solent ponders karma. She doesn't believe in it herself, but finds somebody else who can make a decent argument in its favour.

Sceptics may look critically upon the Bible or the books of Buddhism and find in them “mistakes" - not only imprecisions but also apparent illogicalities. A real mistake though would be for the sceptical to dismiss the works on the basis of imperfection in the rendering of ancient words. Why assume that the undoubted fallibility of the authors of the texts necessarily reflects on the original wisdom of the prophets, whose words and meanings the authors have filtered through their own imperfect consciousness? Wouldn't it be wise to believe that the original words as spoken were not only likely to be such that they were not completely comprehended by those who recorded them for us but were conceivably, simply not fully comprehensible at all by any one of us lesser mortals.

The concept of karma is probably best known in the West today for such teachings as that "we choose our own parents"; that our fortune in this life results from karma earned by our actions in past lives; and that our future luck or fate is determined by our actions - the karma we are creating - in this present life.

Beyond this what we have today of the wisdom of Buddha, as it's come down to us through so many pens in verse, sutra, koan and haiku, is a wonderful resource for those looking for enlightenment. Fortunately too, for those able to resist the charm of a little study of the teachings of Buddhism, there are other angles from which to consider the message in the idea of karma.

From one perspective karma may be conceived as being both the provenance of the genes passed on to us by our parents, who were kind enough to give us life, and of the environment - some of which our parents created about us - in which we've grown up.

Along with the great gift of life that we receive from our parents comes the karma, because the gift is given by our parents (not somebody else's), and because it's also our parents who bring us up, providing our childhood environment, our siblings and even our peers. The environmental effect is due largely to our parents choosing for us the neighbourhood in which we grow up, the school(s) we attend, and myriad lesser matters like the sports we play, clubs we join as kids, and so on. Put another way the argument here is that our life is a gift, given us by our parents; we should accept along with that gift the realization that our parents are not perfect and the upbringing and environmental influences, as well as the genes that they provide us, are of this world.

A mortal birth of parents not wholly unlike us must predestine us in many ways. Such is our karma, while we're young and before we're wise enough to understand that our lives are our own to make of what we may, whatever our inheritance from our parents and our genes.

Now this point of view may be too irreligious for those who believe in a personal God, the chance of salvation, or literal reincarnation and doctrinal teaching on karma. These thoughts have not been set down to dissuade anyone from their beliefs, rather, the aim has been merely to offer some secular comfort to readers not inclined to adopt any such articles of religious faith but perhaps hoping for a little more 'spiritual' meaning in their lives.

As an illustration of this notion that we are the product of our parents, our genes, and of the environment that these factors combined to create when we were young, let's consider an alternative social phenomenon such as the ant colony, or a bee hive. Does any individual of the ant colony stand out long from the crowd, capture your imagination and empathy particularly, make you feel a kinship with it especially? Most likely not. We see the life of the nest or hive, the herd or the colony, as being an integral whole far greater than its many parts. The individual members of these observed societies are clearly of less individual importance than the society to which they each contribute a meaningful - but not irreplaceable – part.

Finally another reward from the pursuit of satori, or 'enlightenment', in this world is that our ingrained attachment to the life of our own self almost inevitably begins to fade, to be replaced by an understanding that we are not alone and not wholly individual but are related one to all, each one of us reflecting - not encompassing - the whole of humanity. For some this satori plays a role similar to that which for others requires 'faith in Christ', or belief in the possibility of salvation promised by the Koran, Bible or Holy Torah.

"There are many paths through life, ours but to choose"

Know your warblogger

It's becoming clear that, according to the shameless right and its warbloggers, a "critique" or a "criticism" may mean any reference to statistical uncertainties in a study, or to a methodology unsuited to their personal prejudices.

Referring today to something as being less than certain is, to these folk of faith who are certain (and certainly wrong, needless to say) about everything, tantamount to condemning it as lacking "moral clarity" or somesuch. They have no doubts themselves, they don't need no feelthy education, experience, wisdom or circumspection. They know it all already, without even looking. They're faith based, baby, and it's the one true faith!

The reason they won't look (examine their own prejudices and their own mythology) is because they need to believe their own stories, those of their team and their leaders. The unexamined life and "faith" are best for peace of mind in your warblogging.

If they looked, and comprehended, they'd become complicit in the crime if they continued to blare away in obedient support of their monsters. They know enough to know that would make them monsters themselves - so the bad stories can't be true. And of course there's no need for them to examine the evidence for anything (supposing they had the capability) that they know cannot be, must not be, true.

Idiots like George Bush and monsters like Dick Cheney, for as long as they've been in positions of power to deliver what their gang wants (contemporary example, a consumingly excessive American lifestyle with no regrets and no comprehension) have always had hirelings and hangers on to bury the corpses for them in return for a share of the spoils.
Cue the mighty warbloggers.

----------
This piece dedicated to Tim Blair, Doctor Horsefeathers, LGF, and those even lesser warbloggers who shall remain unmentioned here, and beneath contempt.

Fafblog Rulez!

Just read it. On Dan Rather's announcement of his retirement, btw.

Bolt flambé

Tim Lambert elegantly roasts another overstated, underqualified opinion on the Lancet study of death rates in Iraq. Today it's Andrew Bolt under fire from Tim. The warbloggers need their tough hides and thick skulls because when it comes to the facts, reality, science ... they don't have a feather to fly with between them.

A competitive life

Winning is easy - simply choose only the fights you can win. Where there are teams involved, choose the winning team and stick with it until you can make a better deal.

Things are relative, of course. Maybe it's seemingly not that easy to pick the winning team from two contenders. Which is harder though - to pick the team most likely to win, or to pick the team that better deserves to win? Sometimes they're one and the same; that's easy. But when they're not?

Let's forget sport and other inconsequential matters. Things like business and war are more important than that. Here it's not the winning that's the most important thing (or "the only!" thing) but the winning of the right things.

Winning is easy. It's choosing the right fight, then fighting as well as you possibly can - as though your life depended on it, perhaps - that's difficult.

Open letter to the Washington Post

So you've pulled Ted Rall without even a word of explanation to your readers? The Washington Post is much the less for it. You've also made Ted's point for him, eloquently, that the less capable and qualified you are to lead, the more likely it is that you'll be put in charge of some (ill-fated) part of Bush's America. A creationist to teach science to children? - next week the Post will be in favour of it, especially if we can get a bunch of ill-informed people to write letters to you. Fail to understand the point of a cartoon, write a nasty letter in a hissy fit campaign, or vote a second term to an appallingly inept and misguided president because you're too muddleheaded and fearful to think straight - and you too may be able to get ahead, in an age of delusion. Please consider doing yourselves, and Ted's wide readership, a favour by renewing your support for one of the really worthwhile journalists in the country.
Yours etc,
Nort

Healin' words

Reading Ted Rall's angry blogging has just - you may think "paradoxically" - cheered me up. As one of his emailers has written to him, reading his thoughts on this page may make you feel a little less alone in your anger and contempt at the results of the US and Australian elections. Whether it'll motivate you to do anything about changing the behaviour of the, on average, spoiled and stooopid countries who've just voted the way they have .... will be up to you of course.

American Civil War II

Tim Lambert has a great piece on where the best universities of the USA are sited, with a map of the top 20 overlaid on a map of voting results at the recent election .... you're right, it's perfectly predictable where this is going .... and still it's well worth a look.

Two Americas? Considering that the USA has many of the world's brightest people, as well as those who voted for a second term for the worst president in history - is another civil war out of the question? There's no doubt that already the blogwars - pitting the limpwristed leftie luvvies who find Kerry an inspirational leader against fearsome, pyjama-clad warbloggers-from-hell who think George Bush is just about brazen and stubborn enough to do well - are very nasty indeed. If words could kill in cyberspace ... well I can think of a few warbloggers I'd be tempted to smarten up with a WMD or two.

Low times for half of America and most of the world

... there's not much hope going around at the moment as the world ponders the nightmare scenario of having the most powerful and dangerous nation in history lead by its fools, thieves and liars, voted into power by the uneducated, the uneducable, the fearfully paranoid and the violent...

thought "Frankis" writing at John Quiggin's blog.

Happy thinking

It's a wonderful thing when two people find one another at the right time in their lives. George Dubya and Osama are such a lovely match for one another that they should go on to accomplish great things together.

Another happy thought is that in Australia's John Winston Howard and the US' George WottheF***? Bush you have two guys who don't actually read or understand books ... who at the polls have resoundingly beaten opponents who can actually write them. The ordinary, "hard working" dummies who vote for Howard and Bush think they're sticking it up them urban elites with the education, and those airs! but it's themselves they're really stiffing. Persuaded by their leaders' demagoguery to vote for the enemies of their "elitist" enemy they'll be the ones who, in the real world, will continue losing jobs, will go on to fight in their leaders' unholy wars, cling fearfully to their faith, and hate the monsters dreamed up for them to hate.

We pretty much all end up living the lives we earn and, on the bright side, for most there'll be some good measure of happiness in earthly days.

The best of times, the worst of times

There are cycles in the history of mankind, and cycles in our own lives. At any particular time: how to tell whether we're taking the high road (on the sunny side of the street, even), or about to plunge into an abyss? Well no doubt it can be tricky but in judging history, at least, we can't do better than to look not at the intentions but at the effects of an era and its historical players. For lest we forget that the worst tyrants and dictators have also acted, mostly, from the best of intentions, and their words have more often than not spoken eloquently to what at the time seemed to be the virtues, the lofty goals, and only the best aspects of a national character.

So not by their words but by the fruits of their actions must we judge actors on the stage of history.

For its undoubted good effect, then, let's end by quoting

Let the world understand that!

It can make pacts and draw up declarations as much as it wishes. I have no faith in paper, but I do have faith in you, my fellow-citizens!

The greatest breach of faith of all time was committed against us Germans. Let us take care that our people internally are never again in a position to be broken. Then no one in the world will threaten us. Then peace will either be maintained for our people or, if necessary, peace will be enforced.

Then our people will bloom and flourish. Our people will be able to put their geniality, their ability, their diligence and steadfastness into the works of peace and human culture. This is our desire. We hope for it and we believe in it.

Twenty years ago that party was founded - at that time a tiny organization. Consider the road from that time until today! Consider the wonders which have occurred about us.

Believe, therefore, because of this wonderful road, also in the course of the German people in its coming great future!

Adolf Hitler
WILHELMSHAVEN
(speech)
April 1, 1939