American Douche Bag vs Cecil the lion

On July 23, 2016, we discontinued our forums. We ask our members to please join us in our new community site, The Hartmann Report. Please note that you will have to register a new account on The Hartmann Report.

180 posts / 0 new

Comments

How big is this 'more like a reserve' zoo? Is it 10, 20, 50 or 100 square miles of uninterupted space and interaction between all the animals?

When thinking about what a zoo actually is it may be useful to ask yourself, how big does a bird cage need to be for a bird not to feel caged. We can talk about what the ethics are of keeping a zoo is if you like.

rs allen
Joined:
Mar. 15, 2012 4:55 pm

A choice of becoming bush meat or retiring in myombe-reserve is the option. Now if we could train the gorillas with AK47s or AR-15s, their chances in the bush woud improve.

This rhino got weird

douglaslee's picture
douglaslee
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 3:01 pm

I'm still processing why this particular act has upset so many of us. I think it's worth the trouble. I'm not at all confident we will all come to the same conclusions, but I feel the process of wondering why is worth the doing.

Yet, Is there any point in taking the trouble to register my disgust for human beings who have this sort of trophy-taking attitude towards other living beings that sparks such outrage among so many of us? How about considering the role of those who have tried to ridicule those of us who express this disgust in this process? Where do they fit in? I do think they fit in by the way.

I guess for our own sakes -- those of us who feel outrage -- if only to show that we are each not alone, not individual nut cases who don't fit the culture of violence that sensitive souls like Derrick Jensen have revealed civilization to be, with serious moral concerns of our own that appear to separate us from the "civilized" members of our communities who perform these underhanded acts, it is personally, at the level of personal responsibility, worthwhile. Also, It can be at least reassuring to have some sense of community with at least some other humans, even if such a community can exact no real control over what is taking place in the world.

The sociopathic (yes, that's me being judgmental) perpetrators and those who support their "right" to all sorts of behaviors I consider sociopathic are unlikely to change because of my disgust for their behavior. For "individualists" who have a passion for doing such acts, we only have The Law, such as it is:

Quote No Justice for Cecil the Lion by Bill Blum, July 31, 2015:

Even if the plan clearly violated Zimbabwe law, the killing probably would have gone without protest had Cecil been an ordinary feline. Despite legal restrictions limiting lion hunting, it remains commonplace in many African countries, Zimbabwe in particular. According to The Guardian, citing figures supplied by the British charity Lion Aid, trophy hunters in Zimbabwe killed about 800 lions from 1999 to 2009 out of a total population of 1,680.

The practice is also highly lucrative. A July 30 article published by U.S. News and World Report disclosed that “Zimbabwe makes an estimated $20 million a year on trophy hunting, which represents 3.2 percent of its tourism revenue. The vast majority of trophy hunters are foreigners and across Africa, 25-30 percent of trophies go to Europe and 65 percent to the U.S.”

Trophy hunters from the U.S. are typically wealthy and invariably white, a recent AlterNet posting asserts. Among those featured by AlterNet are Donald Trump’s sons Eric and Donald Jr., who went to Africa in 2011 and subsequently uploaded to the Internet smiling images of themselves posing with a dead leopard, a deceased waterbuck and a slain crocodile; and GoDaddy Chief Executive Bob Parsons, shown in a photo in the AlterNet post proudly standing, rifle in hand, aside the lifeless body of a bull elephant.

But unlike most wild game slaughtered for mantelpiece mountings or other kicks and jollies, Cecil was special. He had not only been a favorite of visitors to Hwange Park, he had been part of a long-term research project run by Oxford University.

As part of the project, Cecil had been outfitted with a GPS collar, which Palmer and his confederates reportedly tried to destroy after the kill. GPS tracking records enabled Zimbabwe officials to determine Cecil’s whereabouts and no doubt were a key to cracking the investigation.

The question now is what will happen to the perpetrators, especially Palmer, who reportedly has returned to the U.S., without the lion’s head, and gone into hiding, closing his dental practice. In a statement publicly released July 28, Palmer claimed he had “no idea that the lion I took was a local favorite, was collared [with GPS] and part of a study until the end of the hunt. I relied on the expertise of my local professional guides to ensure a legal hunt.”

Killing Cecil, however, is not the first time Palmer has run into legal trouble for unlawful hunting. In 2008, he pleaded guilty to a charge of making a false statement to a federal agent in connection with hunting a Wisconsin black bear in 2006. He was placed on probation and ordered to pay a fine of nearly $3,000.

Typical of any sociopathic behavior is to deny personal responsibility. The sociopathic program that trains sociopaths throughout society, and can be found doctrinally practiced at the highest levels of our public and private "civilized" institutions, is to first of all remember to purchase the services of a good lawyer, then, with good council on hand, proceed to deny that they are in any way personally responsible for their behavior, and of course be sure to use both hands to point in other directions.

.ren's picture
.ren
Joined:
Apr. 1, 2010 6:50 am

My outrage isn’t so much over the killing of one, beloved lion; it’s about the killing-for-sport of ANY wildlife, a pastime that was not, I shamefully admit, on my radar prior to this event. Truth be told, I have been naive enough to think that laws existed everywhere, even in Africa, to regulate hunting, if not in outright prohibition against big game hunting in Africa. In short, if Doug hadn’t brought it up, I wouldn’t have noticed.

Perhaps now people will stop ridiculing the efforts of PETA, which is a fine organization of relentless dedication to the protection of animals. I can’t count the number of times I have noticed PETA, or representative of same, being portrayed in comedy sketches or dramas as wacko, lunatic, soft-headed fools. Even lefties engage in stigmatizing the organization, I am sorry to say.

Now I see PETA proposes federal law banning the import of animal heads and carcasses, in hopes of frustrating the lust of these sociopathic Americans. Good for them. Now let's see what else will be done in response to this outrage, an outrage I think has awakened many Americans, not only me.

Zenzoe
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 3:01 pm

There's a new documentary out called Blood Lions...

Here's the trailer https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-T86GCjCpus

ulTRAX's picture
ulTRAX
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 3:01 pm

For those of us who have become aware that humans, through their participation in a relatively recent form of social organization that falls under the general rubric of "civilization," are in the process of causing a 6th Mass extinction, this "debate" sparked by the questionable behaviors of several perps in a singular, popularized incident, emerges as only the tip of a very deeply explored (by perhaps only a very small number of us) concern about our our individual selves and our place in this world, and what we as a species are doing on this planet.

Yes, it does this:

Killing of Cecil the Lion Sparks Debate Over Trophy Hunts -- National Geographic

But it also leads to this:

Quote Trophy hunting just part of the story behind declining lion numbers in Africa -- The Guardian:

More serious for lion conservation than trophy hunting, say conservationists, is habitat fragmentation, conflict with pastoralists over livestock, and the loss of range land.

All those factors and more are subsets of a larger process that has witnessed that famous statistical hockey puck rise of human populations over the entire planet.

So we have what may very well be an ongoing Anthropogenic 6th Mass extinction, with humans expanding and taking over many habitats for very specific and apparently non sustainable exploitation purposes -- basically to essentially feed and grow the human-oriented, constructed city habitats around the planet.

Meanwhile the vast majority of civilized people continue on, perhaps comfortably unaware, taking part in what turns out to be a project of cancerous infinite growth consisting of all that's associated with the modernist concept of "progress. " Progress, then, can be seen as an "Age of Reason" modernist concept after which many of the various liberal sects in some segments of global civilization have now renamed themselves, as if they differ significantly from those who want to "conserve" the existing order.

Given the potential for contradiction between various aspect of the rationalist liberal (i.e., individually liberating) tradition, and human progress, they often name themselves progressives, sometimes resorting to various rationales for the term in hopes of avoiding collision with a contradiction. Not surprisingly logical contradictions will arise between a concept of human progress, especially technological progress, the notion of being an "environmentalist," and what to do about the future. Not many who have managed to achieve "good" jobs in the social hierarchy with all the material benefits, including the ease and freedom of independent transportation with, for instance, the automobile, are all that willing to give them up. Just one example of the complexity of the issue.

Despite the sometimes contradictory fragmentation that these broadly publicized events may represent in the various side takers, I suspect that a few of us may see a deep structural relationship between the effects of the total human species on the biosphere of this planet and these seemingly singular events.

.ren's picture
.ren
Joined:
Apr. 1, 2010 6:50 am
Quote ulTRAX:

There's a new documentary out called Blood Lions...

Here's the trailer https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-T86GCjCpus

Yet another in a list of outrages for those who are tuned in to these (for us) abhorrent behaviors.

Once the secret to a magic trick is revealed, is it not almost impossible to avoid seeing the sleight of hand after that?

"Civilized" organizational behavior is full of such "magic tricks." A loop hole in the law that allows for the emergence of these predator breeding "industries" for canned hunting is merely one example. Phillip K. Dick is probably writhing in his grave.

I for one feel there is a deep structural pathology that goes with this organizational methodology we call civilization. Turning to legal measures, integral with "rule by law" processes that have emerged to solve these ever emerging problems, may even be a part of that deep structure.

.ren's picture
.ren
Joined:
Apr. 1, 2010 6:50 am

Quote ulTRAX:

There's a new documentary out called Blood Lions...

Here's the trailer https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-T86GCjCpus


Slime balls.

Humans and their instrumental uses of vulnerable others, however, is not limited to civilization and its more evil characteristics.

As much as I admire and respect Derrick Jensen —having read Endgame and A Language Older than Words, and more— for the acute, eloquent truth of his observations on many subjects, I can’t help but notice a blind spot there. Without writing a lengthy treatise on the point, it seems to me his offer as alternative to “civilization” would be a revival of indigenous culture, in an apparent romanticization of primitive ways. This becomes a problem for me, because, as a woman, I don’t see much protection within the indigenous realm, universally, from egregious harms done to women, mainly for lack of enlightened law on behalf of the equal status of women, which, if nothing else, we have begun to achieve within this particular time in human evolution, in this particular civilization. (that’s only one example)

In his Sun Magazine article of April 2001, for example, Jensen interviews a shaman, extolling Mayan culture as an example of the sacred spirituality of indigenous cultures. But, hello, the Mayans, a male-dominated, warlike, stratified, elitist theocracy, practiced human sacrifices to the gods. Need I say more? In fact, that counted as a civilization, in the pejorative sense of the word, not as an indigenous culture, IMHO.

Nevertheless, true indigenous cultures don’t offer much more for the live of women or animals, Native American tribes perhaps being the exception in some cases.

I am not convinced, therefore, that the culprit is “civilization.” Give me another word, because I am not willing to blow this thing up, or commit suicide, on behalf of a romantic fantasy of “simpler” times and communities. "Civilized" does have a good connotation too, after all. Not killing creatures in the wild, or on commercial ranches, would be an example of being civilized. Otherwise, we're talking barbarity.

Obviously, humankind has work to do. As inadequate and slow the progressive spirit and sensibility may be, it’s the only thing capable of bringing balance and health to this planet. To dismiss progressives and their efforts as ineffectual, or even part of the problem, is to throw out the baby with the bathwater. But that’s just me & my subjective opinion. Forgive me, for I have sinned... ;-)

Zenzoe
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 3:01 pm

This one really has me doing some soul searching. I have always been far more upset at wanton killing of animals than humans for some reason. When the Micheal Vick case was all over the news years ago, all of his killing of those poor dogs, and the cruel and barbaric treatment they suffered, I had trouble sleeping for a few nights. Couldnt watch the news reports. When he was reinstated to the NFL, I had hoped he’d be wheeled off on a stretcher, paralyzed even, victim of a vicious hit. That would have made me perfectly happy. Bleep him. This case has me similarly angry. I wouldn’t shed a tear at the news that the good Doc was found impaled and disemboweled on the tip of a rhino horn he had been hunting. Bleep him. I wouldn’t lose a wink of sleep over that.

The news of killings of children on the streets of, say, Chicago, the slaughter in Newtown, or the gunning down of soldiers in Chattanooga or Churchgoers in Charleston didn't faze me as much, I really hate to say. And sorry, Sean Hannity, unborn babies don’t even enter the tearjerk scale for me. And when that monkey ripped that poor woman’s face off a couple years ago, it barely registered. Why not? I am really scratching my head over it.

While I do have a problem with trophy hunters, I won’t blanket-disparage hunters, many of whom kill to eat or to help balance out animal populations. And I am a meat eater, so it isn’t that. I really can’t explain it, even to myself.

I thought I had it figured out – the world is losing its lion population, and we have plenty (really too many) humans. Therefore lion lives > human lives. But then again, we have plenty of dogs! So much for that theory!

I think part of it is animals live to…well, live. All their activities are directed at subsistence and the longevity and protection of their packs. Even when they kill each other, it's part of the grand scheme of things of nature. Not that I even like to see that on the nature shows. But there is a certain amount of purity in that. Well, humans are a different matter. I guess if there were cases of lions killing humans for entertainment, or dogs wantonly torturing humans to train them for money fights, maybe I would give humans more of a break. Humans can be real dirtbags, while animals just live.

So, unfortunately, the dead kids on the streets of Chicago, or at Newtown, or the dead in Chattanooga or Charleston, are humans, after all, and I must tar them with the same curse of being human, with some capacity for human dirtbaggery, which animals don't have.

That’s the best I can do to sort my own personal thoughts on this matter. Most conservative shows were asking this question this week and it is very valid question.

al3's picture
al3
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 3:01 pm

btw, he wrote the book that became Bladerunner, which starred Daryl Hannah -a vegetarian and animal rights advocate (and hot)

douglaslee's picture
douglaslee
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 3:01 pm
Quote douglaslee:

btw, he wrote the book that became Bladerunner, which starred Daryl Hannah -a vegetarian and animal rights advocate (and hot)

I thought you might catch that one.

Do Androids Dream of Electric sheep ---> Blade Runner

Quote Themes in Blade Runner:

A high level of paranoia is present throughout the film with the visual manifestation of corporate power, omnipresent police, probing lights; and in the power over the individual represented particularly by genetic programming of the replicants. Control over the environment is seen on a large scale but also with how animals are created as mere commodities. This oppressive backdrop clarifies why many people are going to the off-world colonies, which clearly parallels the migration to the Americas. The popular 1980s prediction of the United States being economically surpassed by Japan is reflected in the domination of Japanese culture and corporations in the advertising of LA 2019. The film also makes extensive use of eyes and manipulated images to call into question reality and our ability to perceive it.

This provides an atmosphere of uncertainty for Blade Runner's central theme of examining humanity. In order to discover replicants a psychological test is used with a number of questions focused on empathy; making it the essential indicator of someone's "humanity". The replicants are juxtaposed with human characters who are unempathetic, and while the replicants show passion and concern for one another, the mass of humanity on the streets is cold and impersonal. The film goes so far as to put in doubt the nature of Rick Deckard and forces the audience to reevaluate what it means to be human.[4]

.ren's picture
.ren
Joined:
Apr. 1, 2010 6:50 am

Guy McPherson's Nature Bats Last opinion of this incident:

Edge of Extinction: Lion's Share of Blame

.ren's picture
.ren
Joined:
Apr. 1, 2010 6:50 am

Que es mas macho, crossbow or blowing smoke rings in the air?

“...Ah desire! It's

cold as ice

And then it's hot as fire.

Ah desire! First it's red

And then it's

blue.

And everytime I see an iceberg

It reminds me of you.

Doo doo doo doo doo

Doo doo doo doo doo

Que es mas macho iceberg or volcano ?

...Hey look! Over there! It's Frank Sinatra

Sitting in a chair. And he's blowing

Perfect smoke rings

Up into the air. And he's singing:

Smoke makes a staircase for you

To descend. So rare.

Ah desire!

Ah desire!

Ah desire! So random So rare

And everytime I see those smoke rings

I think you're there.

Que es mas macho staircase or smoke rings? ..." —Laurie Anderson

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S7XgTm-vosA
http://www.metrolyrics.com/smoke-rings-lyrics-laurie-anderson.html

Zenzoe
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 3:01 pm

Laurie Anderson is in the book I posted on the Weight/Bluegrass thread. ren has posted her work before, too. Laurie-andersons-farewell-to-lou-reed-a-rolling-stone-exclusive- kind of shows who she is.

The 6th mass extinction will likely begin in 2050. I won't be around, but the lions won't be either, except a few hundred in zoos.

douglaslee's picture
douglaslee
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 3:01 pm
Quote douglaslee:

Laurie Anderson is in the book I posted on the Weight/Bluegrass thread. ren has posted her work before, too. Laurie-andersons-farewell-to-lou-reed-a-rolling-stone-exclusive- kind of shows who she is.


Yes, I remember all of that, though other folks may not have ever heard of her (great farewell by her). Good to pass the word.

But how dare she spend so much of her time on art, when that, below, is on the horizon?! And if she focuses on one issue, metaphor, theme or idea, surely that means she doesn't care about anything else! ;-)

Quote douglaslee:

The 6th mass extinction will likely begin in 2050. I won't be around, but the lions won't be either, except a few hundred in zoos.

Zenzoe
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 3:01 pm

Of course you mean that the 6th mass extinction won't be recognized by humanity at large until 2050 Doug. Even within human terms that extinction has been underway for quite a long time now. By 2050 it certainly will be too late to do anything about it. (said as if it wasn't already a done deal) So I guess as the last large vertebrae mammal left standing on the planet we win. Where's the victory party? I like parties.

rs allen
Joined:
Mar. 15, 2012 4:55 pm
Quote .ren:

Guy McPherson's Nature Bats Last opinion of this incident:

Edge of Extinction: Lion's Share of Blame


Notice how he enjoys his YouTube account, his keyboard, probably his iPhone, and Kindle too, plus all sorts of other devices known to modern humanity, even while he shames others for being outraged at the killing of, apparently, a “mere” lion, as if it’s impossible to care about more than one thing at a time, as if the outrage could not possibly have profound overtones and undertones of meaning for conscious beings.

Here’s my answer to that kind of arrogance: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=COupjRmZiiM

Zenzoe
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 3:01 pm

well, I'm not sure of what to make of Dr. McPherson. Bilogist not climate scientists. I do understand some of his gripes...

I think I'll just leave it that.

How is that Americans account for less than 10% of world population account for 50% of trophy kills? Are Americans that blood thirsty/blood lust with such violent culture?

I sincerely hope that US governement honor its extradition treaty and extradite Dr. Palmer to Zimbabwe. It's been too long and too often for American exceptionalism. US has become the evil empire of the Star Wars SciFi story.

smilingcat
Joined:
Sep. 23, 2010 8:14 am
Quote A Haven From the Animal Holocaust by Chris Hedges:

Only in the insanity of corporate America can nonviolent animal rights activists be charged as terrorists while a white supremacist who gunned down African-Americans in a South Carolina church is charged on criminal counts. Only in the insanity of America can Wall Street financers implode the global economy through massive acts of fraud, causing widespread suffering, and be rewarded with trillions of dollars in government bailouts. Only in the insanity of America can government leaders wage wars that are defined as criminal acts of aggression under international law and then remain, unchallenged, in positions of power and influence. All this makes no sense in an open society. But it makes perfect sense in our species of corporate totalitarianism, in which life, especially the life of the vulnerable, is expendable and corporate profit alone is protected and sanctified as the highest good.

The animal agriculture industry causes suffering, death and environmental degradation—to humans as well as animals—on a scale equaled only by the arms industry and the fossil fuel industry. And by eating meat and dairy products we aid and abet a system that is perhaps the primary cause of global warming and is pumping toxins and poisons into our bodies and the rest of the ecosystem.

As Chris says, we "aid and abet" by being Comfortably Unaware of what we collectively, as an industrial civilized nation ('civil' etymologically coming from civis, or "townsmen"), take part in killing and eating:

Quote Saving the Planet One Meal at a Time by Chris Hedges:

My attitude toward becoming a vegan was similar to Augustine’s attitude toward becoming celibate—“God grant me abstinence, but not yet.” But with animal agriculture as the leading cause of species extinction, water pollution, ocean dead zones and habitat destruction2, and with the death spiral of the ecosystem ever more pronounced, becoming vegan is the most important and direct change we can immediately make to save the planet and its species. It is one that my wife—who was the engine behind our family’s shift—and I have made.

Animal agriculture is responsible for more greenhouse gas emissions than all worldwide transportation combined—cars, trucks, trains, ships and planes.3 Livestock and their waste and flatulence account for at least 32,000 million tons of carbon dioxide (CO2) per year, or 51 percent of all worldwide greenhouse gas emissions.4 Livestock causes 65 percent of all emissions of nitrous oxide, a greenhouse gas 296 times more destructive than carbon dioxide.5 Crops grown for livestock feed consume 56 percent of the water used in the United States.6 Eighty percent of the world’s soy crop is fed to animals, and most of this soy is grown on cleared lands that were once rain forests. All this is taking place as an estimated 6 million children across the planet die each year from starvation and as hunger and malnutrition affect an additional 1 billion people.7 In the United States 70 percent of the grain we grow goes to feed livestock raised for consumption.8

The natural resources used to produce even minimal amounts of animal products are staggering—1,000 gallons of water to produce 1 gallon of milk.9 Add to this the massive clear cutting and other destruction of forests, especially in the Amazon—where forest destruction has risen to 91

A few premises from Derrick Jensen's Endgame:

Quote Derrick Jensen, Endgame, Volume 1: The Problem of Civilization::

PREMISE ONE: Civilization is not and can never be sustainable. This is especially true for industrial civilization.

PREMISE SIX: Civilization is not redeemable. This culture will not undergo any sort of voluntary transformation to a sane and sustainable way of living. If we do not put a halt to it, civilization will continue to immiserate the vast majority of humans and to degrade the planet until it (civilization, and probably the planet) collapses. The effects of this degradation will continue to harm humans and nonhumans for a very long time.

PREMISE SEVEN: The longer we wait for civilization to crash— or the longer we wait before we ourselves bring it down— the messier the crash will be, and the worse things will be for those humans and nonhumans who live during it, and for those who come after.

PREMISE EIGHT: The needs of the natural world are more important than the needs of the economic system. Another way

PREMISE NINETEEN: The culture’s problem lies above all in the belief that controlling and abusing the natural world is justifiable. PREMISE TWENTY: Within this culture, economics— not community well-being, not morals, not ethics, not justice, not life itself— drives social decisions. Modification of Premise Twenty: Social decisions are determined primarily (and often exclusively) on the basis of whether these decisions will increase the monetary fortunes of the decision-makers and those they serve. Re-modification of

Premise Twenty: Social decisions are determined primarily (and often exclusively) on the basis of whether these decisions will increase the power of the decision-makers and those they serve.

Re-modification of Premise Twenty: Social decisions are founded primarily (and often exclusively) on the almost entirely unexamined belief that the decision-makers and those they serve are entitled to magnify their power and/ or financial fortunes at the expense of those below.

Re-modification of Premise Twenty: If you dig to the heart of it— if there is any heart left— you will find that social decisions are determined primarily on the basis of how well these decisions serve the ends of controlling or destroying wild nature.

Jensen, Derrick (2011-01-04). Endgame, Volume 1: The Problem of Civilization (Kindle Locations 36-112). Seven Stories Press. Kindle Edition.

.ren's picture
.ren
Joined:
Apr. 1, 2010 6:50 am

Premise 1 thru infinity: VHEMT.

http://www.vhemt.org/

The alternative, right around the corner, is IN-VHEMT.

69 comments on the Cecil killing, none on the Palestinian baby burned alive in Israel.

http://www.aljazeera.com/news/2015/07/palestinian-baby-burned-death-extremist-attack-150731035331224.html

Palestinian baby burned to death in settler attack

Two homes set ablaze in Duma village in occupied West Bank, with graffiti left on the walls reading "revenge" in Hebrew.

How civilized can you get?

Alberto Ceras 2's picture
Alberto Ceras 2
Joined:
Dec. 9, 2012 8:14 am
Quote Alberto Ceras 2:

Premise 1 thru infinity: VHEMT.

http://www.vhemt.org/

The alternative, right around the corner, is IN-VHEMT.

Well, given that probably that less than 1/10th of a percent of the species would voluntarily do that, I guess we'll just have to let nature take care of its problem children, or as you put it, through an Involuntary Human Extinction MovemenT. But then the notion of involuntary comes into some doubt, since a number of our scientists are now speculating humans too will go extinct in the forthcoming Anthropocene 6th Mass extinction -- as the name implies, an event being aided and abetted if not altogether caused by humans -- so then the very notion of "involuntary" comes into question, since the knowledge that we are playing a role in our own extinction is out there to be acknowledged, if you will.

.ren's picture
.ren
Joined:
Apr. 1, 2010 6:50 am
Quote Alberto Ceras 2:

69 comments on the Cecil killing, none on the Palestinian baby burned alive in Israel.

http://www.aljazeera.com/news/2015/07/palestinian-baby-burned-death-extremist-attack-150731035331224.html

Palestinian baby burned to death in settler attack

Two homes set ablaze in Duma village in occupied West Bank, with graffiti left on the walls reading "revenge" in Hebrew.

How civilized can you get?

I don't know. I thought WWII, Vietnam, the invasion of Iraq were about as civilized as we could get, but civilization keeps upping the ante.

I disagree with Gandhi, by the way, when he was asked what he thought of Western Civilization. But then, his response was in reference to the nuance of the word "civil" that wasn't picked up in English until the late 16th century. And even then it had to do with courteous behavior within a hierarchical system. And of course the British civil that Gandhi had experienced in his lifetime was a legacy of the "civil" service that was originally referenced to the East India Company.

.ren's picture
.ren
Joined:
Apr. 1, 2010 6:50 am

Look out, .ren, we're going to be reminded that this is a discussion about lions - well, a lion - and discussions about burned babies ought to be a separate and unique post. How many comments do you reckon it would get? Well, human slaughter does get boring, there's so much of it.

Alberto Ceras 2's picture
Alberto Ceras 2
Joined:
Dec. 9, 2012 8:14 am
Quote Alberto Ceras 2:

Look out, .ren, we're going to be reminded that this is a discussion about lions - well, a lion - and discussions about burned babies ought to be a separate and unique post. How many comments do you reckon it would get? Well, human slaughter does get boring, there's so much of it.

I'm sorry to feel obliged to say (in light of those who prefer sound bites and anecdotal fragmentation over systemic complexity), as some Zen Buddhists also feel obliged to say, it's all connected, or, simply, one plus one equals one (Season 2, Episode 21).

.ren's picture
.ren
Joined:
Apr. 1, 2010 6:50 am

Yes it is all connected ren. it's a sickness the human species hasn't found a cure for yet. If we aren't killing each other then we go off to kill something else for just sport and fun or to decorate our hats or walls with.

And Alberto, the killing fields are all around. That's no end to dead babies or newly made orphins in this world. Look around, even your own back yard is a good proving ground of that opinion. With 700+ billion and counting humans in the world those killing fields are limited only by the area of the earth (so far). You know, or at least you should know by now my stance about what I think of Israel, but I'm sorry I'm not nor can I get all that worked up over one more dead baby out of 700+ billion people who are constantly at each others thoats about one thing or another. And as senseless as the killing is, frankly I'd rather they kill each other than killing off the wild for fun and games or wall decorations.

rs allen
Joined:
Mar. 15, 2012 4:55 pm
Quote rs allen:And as senseless as the killing is, frankly I'd rather they kill each other than killing off the wild for fun and games or wall decorations.

Of course. Empathy and compassion gotta stop at the doorstep. But why not just keep on killing "each other" right at home? A human life is a human life wherever it happens to be, is it not? Why did anyone get worked up about Sandra Bland anyway? Or those church-goers down in Charleston? She---ee---et, man, save the wild, forget the two-legged domesticated creatures. Well, friends and family excepted. As we know, and as our parents taught us, "they" don't count - I mean those "others," all those who haven't any better sense than to have been born in some foreign country. And when "they" can't kill themselves fast enough to suit "us" we'll send in the drones. Those people. Ugh. "They" can't even speak English.

Alberto Ceras 2's picture
Alberto Ceras 2
Joined:
Dec. 9, 2012 8:14 am
Quote .ren:
Quote A Haven From the Animal Holocaust by Chris Hedges:

Only in the insanity of corporate America can nonviolent animal rights activists be charged as terrorists while a white supremacist who gunned down African-Americans in a South Carolina church is charged on criminal counts. Only in the insanity of America can Wall Street financers implode the global economy through massive acts of fraud, causing widespread suffering, and be rewarded with trillions of dollars in government bailouts. Only in the insanity of America can government leaders wage wars that are defined as criminal acts of aggression under international law and then remain, unchallenged, in positions of power and influence. All this makes no sense in an open society. But it makes perfect sense in our species of corporate totalitarianism, in which life, especially the life of the vulnerable, is expendable and corporate profit alone is protected and sanctified as the highest good.

The animal agriculture industry causes suffering, death and environmental degradation—to humans as well as animals—on a scale equaled only by the arms industry and the fossil fuel industry. And by eating meat and dairy products we aid and abet a system that is perhaps the primary cause of global warming and is pumping toxins and poisons into our bodies and the rest of the ecosystem.

As Chris says, we "aid and abet" by being Comfortably Unaware of what we collectively, as an industrial civilized nation ('civil' etymologically coming from civis, or "townsmen"), take part in killing and eating:

Quote Saving the Planet One Meal at a Time by Chris Hedges:

My attitude toward becoming a vegan was similar to Augustine’s attitude toward becoming celibate—“God grant me abstinence, but not yet.” But with animal agriculture as the leading cause of species extinction, water pollution, ocean dead zones and habitat destruction2, and with the death spiral of the ecosystem ever more pronounced, becoming vegan is the most important and direct change we can immediately make to save the planet and its species. It is one that my wife—who was the engine behind our family’s shift—and I have made.

Animal agriculture is responsible for more greenhouse gas emissions than all worldwide transportation combined—cars, trucks, trains, ships and planes.3 Livestock and their waste and flatulence account for at least 32,000 million tons of carbon dioxide (CO2) per year, or 51 percent of all worldwide greenhouse gas emissions.4 Livestock causes 65 percent of all emissions of nitrous oxide, a greenhouse gas 296 times more destructive than carbon dioxide.5 Crops grown for livestock feed consume 56 percent of the water used in the United States.6 Eighty percent of the world’s soy crop is fed to animals, and most of this soy is grown on cleared lands that were once rain forests. All this is taking place as an estimated 6 million children across the planet die each year from starvation and as hunger and malnutrition affect an additional 1 billion people.7 In the United States 70 percent of the grain we grow goes to feed livestock raised for consumption.8

The natural resources used to produce even minimal amounts of animal products are staggering—1,000 gallons of water to produce 1 gallon of milk.9 Add to this the massive clear cutting and other destruction of forests, especially in the Amazon—where forest destruction has risen to 91

Thanks, ren, for posting those two articles. Chris Hedges consistently sends eloquent clarion calls out to the rest of us, and this one —animal abuse industry/meat consumption/ethics— is long overdue. I, for one, have been annoying everyone with the very same message for a very long time, mostly finding that people do not care to link their consumption of animal products to damage of the environment, especially not the idea that their consumption makes them complicit in global warming, etc. They don't want to think about it and make long lists of bogus reasons they cannot give up their meaty diets. Plus, to bring it up at all is to be a "soft-headed extremist."

As for the government labeling animal rights heroes as "terrorists," I can understand it— it must be terrifying for industry owners to have to face the ugly truth about themselves: they're scum, as low as human beings can get. And that realization has to be defended against with aggression and force.

It is in that respect that I agree completely with the complaint about "civilization." It ain't civil, at least in its more egregious manifestations of human chauvinism, greed, lust, selfishness and indifference to the suffering of vulnerable others, which has to include the abuse and extinction other sentient species.

Zenzoe
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 3:01 pm
Quote Alberto Ceras 2:
Quote rs allen:And as senseless as the killing is, frankly I'd rather they kill each other than killing off the wild for fun and games or wall decorations.

Of course. Empathy and compassion gotta stop at the doorstep. But why not just keep on killing "each other" right at home? A human life is a human life wherever it happens to be, is it not? Why did anyone get worked up about Sandra Bland anyway? Or those church-goers down in Charleston? She---ee---et, man, save the wild, forget the two-legged domesticated creatures. Well, friends and family excepted. As we know, and as our parents taught us, "they" don't count - I mean those "others," all those who haven't any better sense than to have been born in some foreign country. And when "they" can't kill themselves fast enough to suit "us" we'll send in the drones. Those people. Ugh. "They" can't even speak English.

You really are a condensending little turd. What gives you all this moral high ground? What gives you the right to tell me what I should find important? What I should feel.

You find the Mideast situation so damn provoking? Why aren't you over there with a gun in your hand or there saving a baby or standing the line against yet another illegal settlement instead of lecturing me about what you perceive as my lack of values beyond the door jamb. You know nothing about me you little shit.

rs allen
Joined:
Mar. 15, 2012 4:55 pm

I see in my haste to get out into the cool morning air to split and stack wood so that I can take advantage of this summer heat to dry that wood for winter that I left behind a few grammatical messes. Oh well, I think the gist of it's still there.

I have come to look at our situation in systemic terms now. That does not mean I in anyway dismiss the individual and her or his angst at facing what we now face. I just think blame at that level is not a solution, though it certainly can be an extremely important form of acknowledgment.

For instance, I acknowledge and personally feel all the elements of outrage aimed at the now infamous dentist from Minnesota who doug honors with the title of this thread. But we are of such complexity as a society that I must leave it to his neighbors to put any actual pressure on him in order to shame him for his act. We are not well organized to do that for every systemic occurrence.

So, who's going to shame Monsanto, DuPont, or the biggest and less known (generally, it seems when I ask people) baddest of all, Cargill, into behaving according to some common sense of human decency and morality? Looking closely at what that entails, I see it brings up what they are. And what they are at heart (a lovely word that has no anatomical correspondence to a sociopathic institution) -- each and every one of them -- are institutional machines (In his Technological Society, Jacques Ellul points out institutions are a kind of advanced technology). Machines that have no more self reflective human sense of morality, no capacity for remorse, not any more than any other machinery humans create. And I have no hope for any future machine creations that involve this much questioned potential of AI sentience. They do, however, fit within the artificially abstracted ecologies of complex human social systems and have their own legal imperative to survive and profit in whatever way our legal system can be construed to permit.

For the big picture I'll turn to Chris Hedges, once again, to summarize my response to all the others who have expressed their own very valid and personal versions of the insanity that we face in our complex systems. Here are his concluding paragraphs to the article I linked above:

Quote Saving the Planet One Meal at a Time, by Chris Hedges:

“If we had a different timeline, or if we had 1.5 billion people on the planet, then there might be halfway measures we could take,” Kuhn said. “The situation we are dealing with ecologically, however, means there is no way left but an immediate shift to a plant-based lifestyle.”

“How can we best use our resources?” Oppenlander asks in “Comfortably Unaware.” “What foods will have the very least effect on our planet? Which foods best promote our own human health and wellness, and which are the most compassionate? Do we really need to slaughter another living thing in order for us to eat? Or, sadly, is it because we want to?”

We have only a few years left, at best, to make radical changes to save ourselves from ecological meltdown. A person who is vegan will save 1,100 gallons of water, 20 pounds CO2 equivalent, 30 square feet of forested land, 45 pounds of grain, and one sentient animal’s life13 every day. We do not, given what lies ahead of us, have any other option.

As a side note I began to pay attention to those vegan-oriented environmental savings when I studied ecology back in the early seventies at one of the founding universities for the Green Revolution, Michigan State University, or Moo Yoo, as some of us fondly called it. One "fact" I discovered was that 90 percent of the food that went into feeding an animal to be slaughtered and consumed was turned into, basically, manure. Of the 100 percent of that consumable energy, only ten percent ends up on the eating tables of meat, dairy and poultry product consumers.

That and growing up on a farm, an experience that remains a part of my present day food choice awareness. It was in its day, a more or less organic family farm. As such a very personal farm, unlike those who were farming industrially in exponentially growing numbers as we of the family farm genre were driven into the endangered species realm. It was an environment where I had to get to know the animals that were to be consumed in various ways... the chickens laying eggs I stole from their nests, candled and prepared for sale at Ann Arbor's farmer's market, the cows "giving" milk with the help of our mechanical milking machines, the pigs.... well, some became the sausage on my breakfast plate to go with those eggs, and that was something I eventually could not eat.

Every now and then I sit back and look at how easily my individual concerns are instantly wiped out by the collective choices of 7-point-something billion humans.

.ren's picture
.ren
Joined:
Apr. 1, 2010 6:50 am
Quote rs allen:You know nothing about me you little shit.

I know enough, rs allen, and you reveal more of yourself with each comment.

You and I, and everyone living, is an "other" to some other. Your failure of universal compassion is a failure of the educational system that some years ago rejected liberal education - the humanities, the arts - in favor of "practical" education that relies on - and rewards - rote learning rather than independent thinking.

Quote.ren Every now and then I sit back and look at how easily my individual concerns are instantly wiped out by the collective choices of 7-point-something billion humans._

No, not wiped out. You, and others like you, provide sane and decent examples that inspire others to follow.

Alberto Ceras 2's picture
Alberto Ceras 2
Joined:
Dec. 9, 2012 8:14 am

I appreciate the sentiment Alberto, but I remain staggered by our collective ignorance... and I do not exclude myself. But mystery remains about how things ever manage to work themselves out, like the play in Shakespeare In Love, and in that mystery lies some hope.

.ren's picture
.ren
Joined:
Apr. 1, 2010 6:50 am

Yes child burnt alive in mid-east is horrific at all level. So is the "sanitized" "precision" drone strike that kills a wedding party... But if we try to bring all this in on one thread, the ensuing cacaphony will drown out everything and nothing worthwhile will be said.

Back to Cecil! And connected to Cecil. I applaud Zimbabwe for issuing a moritorium on trophy hunting and they have now included two other individual for illegal trophy hunt.

Add my comment to Dr. McPhereson's video linked in by .ren. Gist of which to me was so what with Cecil!? is more of resignation by Dr. McPhereson in that we will all die as in human specie will be extinct by 2030. And so will most other creatures on earth. So why bother arguing about it...

smilingcat
Joined:
Sep. 23, 2010 8:14 am
Quote smilingcat:

Yes child burnt alive in mid-east is horrific at all level. So is the "sanitized" "precision" drone strike that kills a wedding party... But if we try to bring all this in on one thread, the ensuing cacaphony will drown out everything and nothing worthwhile will be said.

I tried to call attention to the attention paid to Cecil as contrasted to the total lack of attention paid to the tragic death of a Palestinian child burned alive by a few vicious Israeli settlers. That seemed to me to epitomize the shallowness of some TH blogs and comments.

Alberto Ceras 2's picture
Alberto Ceras 2
Joined:
Dec. 9, 2012 8:14 am
Quote .ren:

I appreciate the sentiment Alberto, but I remain staggered by our collective ignorance... and I do not exclude myself. But mystery remains about how things ever manage to work themselves out, like the play in Shakespeare In Love, and in that mystery lies some hope.

And a collective ignorance that the most dogged, tireless effort cannot hope to completely dispel. Even so a distant, blurred and fleeting glimpse of truth rewards the effort. As for compassion, I’ve just been reading a collection of short stories that shed some light on the concept - that might dispel a modicum of ignorance. Anyone interested can begin with the beautiful, tragic story simply titled “Rose” in the collection “Selected Stories” by Andre Dubus. After reading the story – or stories – Wikipedia’s brief biography of the author provides other real life instances of compassion. Compassion is sorely needed these dark days - and not just for the Cecils.

Alberto Ceras 2's picture
Alberto Ceras 2
Joined:
Dec. 9, 2012 8:14 am

I've found plenty of compassion in Andre's writing. But where I find compassion others may find insult. Where I see sparks of compassion, others can find arrogance and disregard.

I see plenty of cruelty taking place everywhere, including on this board. Maybe I'm just overly sensitive. I try my best not to exacerbate any of it. Even when it's attributed to me. I agree that compassion's sorely needed.

.ren's picture
.ren
Joined:
Apr. 1, 2010 6:50 am

To .ren and Alberto:

Despite the clear sensitivity and eloquence of both your writings, of both your exquisite sensibilities w/ regard to the issues that touch you, apparently, with great urgency —concerns I share with you— I think what comes across to some of us, perhaps unfairly, is a sort of self-congratulatory smugness, a superiority compared to the rest of us that relentlessly wishes to place yourselves among the blessed few who have any idea what is worth being concerned about, how much to be concerned, how long and how far. In short, "everybody's out of step but Johnnie."

Well, yes, I am obnoxious in my own way, often and sometimes without respect for the feelings of others (perhaps, like now). I know that. But really, how about a little compassion for the rest of us here, and how about allowing people to discuss issues without judging them as less enlightened and more ignorant than thou?

I, for one, Alberto, have wept for the plight of innocents in Palestine, many times and without bothering to tell you. That I didn't mention it here, doesn't mean it hasn't happened.

I am sorry if my criticism and my lumping you together is unfair. I am a work in progress too...

Zenzoe
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 3:01 pm

I'm a newbie to these threads, but being well versed from other webbies, to try to excuse one's self's bad behaviour in writing as "obnoxious in my own way" is rather a cop-out, nicht war? is it not?

take personal responsibilitiy or shut up.

That is to remedy obnoxiousness, not hollow bullshyt non-apologies for insulting others?

Reading this thread I see a not-spoken animosity perhaps? a history?

otherwise, rather unfair, it seems

mrs.vonderhoffholz's picture
mrs.vonderhoffholz
Joined:
Aug. 3, 2015 6:12 pm

English is not my 1st language, but to use the word "wept"

I understand that to mean a gret deal of drama, and insincere?

mrs.vonderhoffholz's picture
mrs.vonderhoffholz
Joined:
Aug. 3, 2015 6:12 pm

I do not pretend to understand the depths of every argument leading up to it, but I do appreciate its concluding line:

7 Whereof one cannot speak, thereof one must be silent. (p. 90)

or, for those who prefer the philosopher's original language,

7 Wovon man nicht sprechen kann, darüber muss man schweigen. (p. 162)

Title: Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus

Author: Ludwig Wittgenstein

Contributor: Bertrand Russell

Translator: C. K. Ogden

.ren's picture
.ren
Joined:
Apr. 1, 2010 6:50 am

Quote mrs.vonderhoffholz:

I'm a newbie to these threads, but being well versed from other webbies, to try to excuse one's self's bad behaviour in writing as "obnoxious in my own way" is rather a cop-out, nicht war? is it not?

take personal responsibilitiy or shut up.

That is to remedy obnoxiousness, not hollow bullshyt non-apologies for insulting others?

Reading this thread I see a not-spoken animosity perhaps? a history?

otherwise, rather unfair, it seems

———

English is not my 1st language, but to use the word "wept"

I understand that to mean a gret deal of drama, and insincere?

Your your comments lack a few essential ingredients— knowledge of me, knowledge of the two people I addressed, and awareness of the history of interactions between us, interactions that go way, way back on this forum. For one thing, the fellows I criticized do not need you to defend them; they not only are quite capable of defending themselves, but most likely they are not in the least disturbed, nor shocked, nor deeply wounded by my comments. For another thing, each has criticized me to my face, so to speak, on other occasions, so it’s not as though this is the first time for words between us.

In fact, I wouldn’t be surprised if .ren and Alberto in fact realize that I think they’re great, and that my more positive comments were sincere. I am nothing if not sincere.

The word wept does not at all indicate a “great deal of drama” or insincerity. But you can believe me, when I say, “Drop dead, Mrs.Vonderhoffholz, who ever you are.” Now, that’s sincere!

Zenzoe
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 3:01 pm

The Criticil Thinkers' Dictionary by the same author that wrote skeptic's dictionary had some supplements to the index

actor-observer bias

affirming the consequent

appeal to popularity

appeal to the mob

arbitrary coherence

bandwagon fallacy

better-than-average bias

black or white fallacy

citation bias

conjunction fallacy

correspondence bias

democratic fallacy

dispositional attribution bias

either-or fallacy

emotional attribution bias

equivocation

evading the issue

evaluator bias

false charge of ad hominem

false dilemma (false dichotomy)

file-drawer effect

fundamental attribution error

gambler’s fallacy

hasty conclusion

hostile media effect

hostile referee effect

illusion of objectivity

intellectual attribution bias

irrelevant appeal to emotions

irrelevant comparison

law of contagion

law of similarity

law of small numbers

loss aversion memory

Carroll, Robert (2013-11-08). The Critical Thinker's Dictionary: Biases, Fallacies, and Illusions and What You Can Do About Them (Kindle Locations 5787-5814). . Kindle Edition.

I'm only on the Ls. Sorry about that, the links did not paste with the entries.

douglaslee's picture
douglaslee
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 3:01 pm
Quote Zenzoe:

For one thing, the fellows I criticized do not need you to defend them; they not only are quite capable of defending themselves, but most likely they are not in the least disturbed, nor shocked, nor deeply wounded by my comments

True, to some extent, especially the last part. As far as the ability to defend myself, I do my best to practice what I consider to be the best defense, which is no defense. I've never cared for debate, either, which to me involves defending opinions through a kind of logical fisticuffs. Mostly, Zenzoe, you are having your debates of character with yourself, at least when you believe you are having them with me. Your above sentiments appear to acknowledge that.

Quote Zenzoe:

For another thing, each has criticized me to my face, so to speak, on other occasions, so it’s not as though this is the first time for words between us

I've asked you before to show me any such evidence, but I'll ask you once again, only because I make every effort to avoid engaging in personal criticism and I want to know where in my writing that I'm failing. I do try my best to focus on the issues, often bringing in a variety of other voices besides my own in order to spread out the range of perspectives. I try to make clear that I speak for myself while these others speak for themselves. That way the usual ad hominem logical fallacies applied to them will not be, by extension, applied to me, thereby commiting yet another logical fallacy. Doesn't always work out that way of course. But I keep at it.

Let me state clearly: I wish with utmost sincerity to avoid even an appearance that I engage in personal criticism of any members of this board.

So I ask: where -- that is, with what words -- have I criticized you, personally, to your "face" (so to speak)? Please show me. There must be some evidence for this claim on this board. I want to see what I wrote. If there's some way I can avoid creating the impression I am criticizing anyone personally in the future, I want to learn how to do that. So I it may help me to know how I've done so, if I indeed have.

.ren's picture
.ren
Joined:
Apr. 1, 2010 6:50 am

Thank you, mrs.vonderhoffholz, for your comments and your insight. I hope that you will continue to visit and to post on this site. Please don't be put off by the rude comments of some of the habitués- best to ignore them.

I’d begun to think that I was one of the few voices of sanity, of compassion, but no, not so - even CNN understands:

http://edition.cnn.com/2015/07/31/opinions/ghitis-cecil-outrage/

How outrage over Cecil the lion killing misses the point

By Frida Ghitis

Updated 1245 GMT (1945 HKT) August 3, 2015

The intensity of the backlash over the trophy killing has triggered a counter-backlash. Why, some are now asking, do people care so much about the death of a lion when so many human beings are suffering and dying? The surge of sorrow for a dead lion, they say, when compared to the relative quiet about other wrongs, reveals a moral flaw in our humanity, a defect in our moral compass.

/////

No, there is nothing morally flawed in being outraged about the death of a gorgeous lion. Go ahead, pat yourself on the back over that. Sign a petition, even.

But there is something deeply wrong in not caring, not doing more to stop the attacks that continue to kill thousands in Syria; or about the millions of suffering refugees created by war and terror--- the highest numbers since World War II -- or about the 9 million people (3 million of them children!) who die of hunger-related causes every year.

Yes, to repeat from the above quote, it's a flaw that I’ve detected In several who regularly post here on TH: “...reveals a moral flaw in our humanity, a defect in our moral compass.”

This courageous fellow understood something about compassion. He spent years in a Nazi prison for his understanding. He wasn’t there because of the death of a lion.

First they came for the Socialists, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Socialist.

Then they came for the Trade Unionists, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Trade Unionist.

Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Jew.

Then they came for me—and there was no one left to speak for me.

Martin Niemöller

This poem, too, bears repeating:

No man is an island,

Entire of itself,

Every man is a piece of the continent,

A part of the main.

If a clod be washed away by the sea,

Europe is the less.

As well as if a promontory were.

As well as if a manor of thy friend's

Or of thine own were:

Any man's death diminishes me,

Because I am involved in mankind,

And therefore never send to know for whom the bell tolls;

It tolls for thee.

John Donne

It does. Toll for thee. And me.

Alberto Ceras 2's picture
Alberto Ceras 2
Joined:
Dec. 9, 2012 8:14 am

(response to #93, not 94)

Quote .ren:
Quote Zenzoe:

For another thing, each has criticized me to my face, so to speak, on other occasions, so it’s not as though this is the first time for words between us

I've asked you before to show me any such evidence, but I'll ask you once again, only because I make every effort to avoid engaging in personal criticism and I want to know where in my writing that I'm failing.

How convenient for you that your hurtful comments to me were stated in a thread which ended up being deleted by the owner of the thread. That was the thread —I’ve forgotten the title of the post, but among the participants was NMHiker— where the discussion was centered on spirituality, and it got quite heated, with my being treated like a “troll” simply for being an opponent of magical thinking. In any case, my contributions to this forum got dismissed on that thread, by you, as my “epic crusades"—a rebuke that stung, coming from you, for its shaming (clearly ineffective, though), its negative view of my contributions on this forum— and my character as one which trollishly wishes to get attention by “alienating everyone” I encounter, in effect. I did not copy/save your comments, and I regret not having done so, because now you can play the innocent, even while I alone can see now just how dishonest you can be.

We have also have had lovely exchanges, which is the reason I’ve mostly forgiven that moment of insult on your part, even while I do not forget it— nobody has to be perfect in my book.

In any case, I see that it was mostly Alberto who took the position that to care for Cecil was to ignore everything else, or the “more important issues,” according to his hierarchy of concerns. His thinking on that score well exemplifies the logical fallacy known as a false dilemma, but I don’t expect him to acknowledge it nor apologize for insulting others by employing it.

Enough. I'm over it. I continue to admire your, ren's, commentaries, even when I don't necessarily agree. Disagreement is not dissing. I even have disagreements with people I love deeply. Life goes on.

Zenzoe
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 3:01 pm

I remember that thread, or one similar to it Zoe as I was also one of the birds who you were trying pour salt on his tail. Yeah, it took awhile to get over that.....don't do it again ;-/

Hey, wantta hear another bird story from a little more that a month ago?

For this thread, I've got no apologies to make. I won't take any sanctimonious soap box bullshit from anybody about where my compassion lays or should lie.. The human species has had at least a couple of millinnium to work this crap out. They're still killing each other for no good reason. For all the the SUPPOSED high reason man possesses they are still killing each other, still part of the machinery (if you will). And mean while all around him the rest of the world dies in his wake. So now he is coming to the end of the road. We can almost count our own days now just like we can count the number of animals left in the world. The only living things we can't keep count of now are a decreasing number of a few species of insects, some reptiles and human beings. Everything else is just ever few and fewer numbers till the tally reads finally zero on that species (whatever they may be). It's seems to me what I have to say on what man does to one another or the solutions to their conflicts are just effective as any others I've heard or read whether in classical form, heralded in headlines or paraded out in a public forum.

I will not take snotty down the nose dictates from the shade of a kepote tree about where my empathy should be placed at any or at all times. I've no apologies to make.

rs allen
Joined:
Mar. 15, 2012 4:55 pm
Quote Zenzoe:

How convenient for you that your hurtful comments to me were stated in a thread which ended up being deleted by the owner of the thread. That was the thread —I’ve forgotten the title of the post, but among the participants was NMHiker— where the discussion was centered on spirituality, and it got quite heated, with my being treated like a “troll” simply for being an opponent of magical thinking. In any case, my contributions to this forum got dismissed on that thread, by you, as my “epic crusades"—a rebuke that stung, coming from you, for its shaming (clearly ineffective, though), its negative view of my contributions on this forum— and my character as one which trollishly wishes to get attention by “alienating everyone” I encounter, in effect. I did not copy/save your comments, and I regret not having done so, because now you can play the innocent, even while I alone can see now just how dishonest you can be.

Chris, who I've known since I first came on this board in Feb, 2004, and who I consider a friend, though we've never met, who went by the the handle NMHiker, did indeed delete that thread.

My own posting on that thread, which was in the seldom visited forum, The Prophet's Way, was itself an anomoly to the way I have been posting since all those posters who visited that thread at mostly Chris's request left Thom's board in 2006. At Thom's in those years, many of us connected somehow through these words, also there were options available for private contact that are no longer available, and we did contact that way, and we were able to share emails which can lead to far more intimate ways of sharing through words. And thus we became friends, best anyone can in this environment.

So when they showed up on that thread, I relinquished some of my now carefully followed self invented rules of behavior. That, I suspected even then, would come back to haunt me.

One person in particular treated you as a troll, as I recall, while several others attempted to make contact and show in some way they were self actuated beings, not the cult members you implied they must be to even consider the topic of spirituality. One in particular, Kathy, is an attorney working in New York. Not exactly cult material. As I recall, her last few lengthy posts went without a response. Of course, the thread did disappear. Nevertheless, though I know a bit about Chris, and I have some understanding of his tendency to react in less than empathic ways, I did not condone his behavior and I did my best to distance myself from it. It is not my way to lecture anyone in public about how they should behave. I wouldn't even do that with a socially disruptive and disrespectful child. However, the logical fallacy of guilt by association seemed to play its role, and when you lumped my behavior with his and I asked you to show me where I had said what you claimed I had said, we did run into a bit of a rough spot. I apologize for using the word "crusade" that seems to have troubled you, I wouldn't use that sort of characterization normally. I'm sure I did or it wouldn't have stuck with you. I can't remember doing it or the context.

I'm somewhat glad the thread disappeared, it was kind of a Brigadoon moment for me. I had another great conversation of so many I've had in the past with Usha and then she disappeared into the mist again for another hundred years, though I could contact her on Facebook where I never go. The way things are now without a crowd of posters trying to be friends is more the way things simply are on the Internet for me. I leave the personal for my face to face interactions.

I'm glad when I can write, or communicate in any other way with people without disturbing them, and I hope that can continue. The world has plenty of emotional disturbances roiling about, it doesn't need any of mine. I certainly don't expect agreement. I encourage everyone to post their viewpoints. I just want to share what I see in case anyone else wants to look as well. The written word is easy for me to ignore, seems to me it can be for anyone. I make an effort to explain how I see, not that anyone needs to care, but it's part of my writing process. I like to write.

Listening to (listening includes reading) different ways of seeing the world is probably the single most important way I have expanded my own ways of thinking about it. I love to invoke my imagination.

I don't mean this in any critical way, but I just want to mention that I am uncomfortable with admiration of any sort -- towards me or from me towards anyone else. I appreciate the sentiment when expressed, but it's a family thing. I was put on what I felt to be an undeserved pedestal, certainly an unwanted one, then excoriated for not achieving my so-called potential. I have a visceral reaction to any hint of that now. Hard to deprogram, but at least I'm aware of it. My rebellion did have something to do with how I began to think about the world, so it wasn't all bad for me. I enjoy my mind. I can't remember when I didn't.

.ren's picture
.ren
Joined:
Apr. 1, 2010 6:50 am

Ren, thank you for that gracious response. My only correction, if that isn’t too strong a word: I only sense “cult” behavior, when I’m surrounded by people whose religion or spirituality renders them intolerant of questioning, doubt, and dissent, and who punish dissenters with hostility, rejection, anger, ridicule, and/or intellectual insinuations as to the inferior imagination of dissenters. Plus, my inner BS detector goes off, when the group has a personality to whom they’re committed and any criticism of him/her inspires harsh reactions, even exclusion from the group. That discussion had some of those characteristics, including exclusivity, which I can understand, given the background you’ve explained. You wanted to have the same sort of satisfying discussions you had had in the past, and my attitude felt like an intrusion. I saw it as a public forum, so I felt entitled to express my opinion, not to disrupt, but because the sound of magical thinking annoys the heck out of me. Sorry, but that’s just me.

Quote rs allen:

Hey, wantta hear another bird story from a little more that a month ago?


Sure.
I seem to remember something about a beautiful story you told on that thread— I’m thinking dog story? Anyway, I did copy and save another story of yours from another thread, which I will only link to, for space considerations. Anyway, I thought it was a lovely one. http://www.thomhartmann.com/forum/2014/11/“hogwash-and-other-down-earth-observations?page=1#comment-293085

BACK TO THE SUBJECT: Here’s a disgusting reality:

Quote Robin Wright:

Cecil the Lion and Robert Mugabe

...By 1987, when Mugabe became President, he had consolidated his power over every branch of government, and he has ruled ever since. Today he is the world’s oldest national leader. Four months before a Minnesota dentist killed Cecil the lion, Mugabe celebrated his ninety-first birthday with a feast of wildlife. The menu included dishes of young elephant, killed especially for a party with twenty thousand of Mugabe’s supporters. Another elephant was killed so that constituents could celebrate, too. Mugabe was presented with a lion trophy and a crocodile trophy that were to be stuffed...
http://www.newyorker.com/news/news-desk/cecil-the-lion-and-robert-mugabe

Zenzoe
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 3:01 pm
Quote smilingcat: is more of resignation by Dr. McPhereson in that we will all die as in human specie will be extinct by 2030. And so will most other creatures on earth. So why bother arguing about it...

Like grand conspiracy theories, McPherson's absurd prediction doesn't help the cause. Anthropogenic climate change is real and environmental degradation is a serious concern, but McPherson gives ammunition to deniers. When there are more humans in 2030 than there are today, will McPherson admit his mistake? Even crazy Harold Camping admitted his.

Garrett78's picture
Garrett78
Joined:
Sep. 3, 2010 8:20 am
Quote Garrett78:. When there are more humans in 2030 than there are today, will McPherson admit his mistake? Even crazy Harold Camping admitted his.
Nope. the end of times is always 15 years out. Next year it will be 2031.

stwo's picture
stwo
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 3:01 pm

Fundamentally religious-minded thinkers could take the trouble to learn the difference between prediction and scenario.

This would be especially crucial when they are "investigating" (I have to put that term in quotes here, sorry) what a rational science-minded person is saying about the biosphere of this planet.

A scientific method educated, science-minded person is keenly aware that we are only able to draw scenarios, that is, hypothesis, or what-if-this-then-possibly-that-consequences about our extremely complex natural habitat, planet earth.

A science minded person is well aware we are a story telling species, not a god-making-the-world species. Ideologues tend to fall more along the patterns of the latter, and that will prove out in their word-based projections of how others see the world. That is, they will tend to project patterns of their own inner ideologue world views onto others who may happen to be quite different, in that they are science-minded in creating possibility views of the world, not certainty views.

Ideologues tend to exhibit in words a different pattern in their perspectives. They appear driven towards embracing a kind of fundamentalist certainty in their world views, which they will express with declarative statements of manufactured facts, generally involving the verb 'to be' in their grammatical constructions. A thorough scientific understanding of this phenomenon of course remains speculative. It's not by any means a hypocritical statement of certainty, just merely a pattern to notice and explore. Each is challenged to come to their own conclusions.

This is not intended as a blanket labeling of all religious-minded folks, by any means. Robert Jensen, for instance, (We Are All Apocalyptic Now) self identifies a Unitarian religious-minded person, yet his interpretation of the world tends to fall more along the lines of an if-then hypothesizing scenario-making process. He explains his patterned way of thinking about the world in this talk about "cults," where we can perhaps recognize that in his view, cults are made up of people who would rather follow someone else than possibility-think for themselves: Robert Jensen on Capitalism v. Christianity: A Tale of Two Cults.

An understanding of that difference could possibly make communication just a little bit easier between those who approach the world through an ever searching, ever wondering, ever exploring scientific method, with its ever self-acknowledging awareness of the limits of our ability to know with absolute certainty, and those who read and interpret the world through the ideologue's screen of preconceptual certainty.

At the very least, understanding that critical difference between prediction and scenarios could help ideologue-oriented folks avoid some of the unnecessary projections of certainty fallacies onto the science-minded that tend to create friction rather than self reflection. But that's just another if-then scenario.

Fatal Fallacies: How Ideologues Repeal the Laws of Logic

That scenario has what I'd consider an extremely low probability of happening on a broad scale in modern industrial civilizations. What's more probable in my estimation is we will continue to experience the various forms of logical fallacy opinion projections that ideologues bring to the communication party. Like, for instance, the ever predominant ad hominem logical fallacy of attacking the individual rather than the scenario that an individual portrays. Especially if those scenarios are potentially scary to an individual's or group's normalcy bias.

The science minded, then, are challenged to learn how to react to their own emotions triggered by logical fallacies they will likely encounter in their often tentative and fledgling human communication efforts.

.ren's picture
.ren
Joined:
Apr. 1, 2010 6:50 am

America: Meet Your Overlord Rupert Murdoch...

Thom plus logo The main lesson that we've learned so far from the impeachment hearings is that if Richard Nixon had had a billionaire like Rupert Murdoch with a television network like Fox News behind him, he never would've resigned and America would have continued to be presided over by a criminal.
Powered by Pressflow, an open source content management system