Too Much To Dream

Simple and patriotic. I give you a 10!

Glad I finished my coffee before I got to that last bit! I nearly swallowed by Marlboro, though. "Look!" - cough, sputter.

"..reasons, facts, and statistics"...such silly things.

How does one decide what to believe if not on the basis of such things?

David Foster:

1. Argue that feelings are EVERY BIT AS LEGITIMATE as facts.
2. Argue that EVERYONE'S FEELINGS are every bit as legitimate as each other's.
3. DELEGITIMATE facts and statistics as "patriarchal," "Euro-centric," "male-thinking," "favoring those in power," etc.
4. Inculcate the belief (called "post-modernism" by some) that there is no objective truth, that facts are subject to interpretation, and each interpretation is equal (i.e., facts+feelings>facts alone).

Once you've internalized the above four aspects, then it becomes clear that the majority's feelings are what matters. And since everyone, even those in favor of war, want peace, then peace, which everyone favors, is clearly the answer.

N'est-ce pas?

Oooh! You speak Anglo Saxon real good like!

(what's Anglo Saxon?) [snicker]

>

That reflects a common (but irritating) trait among ivory-tower elitist types- treating American English as not just a dialect, but a separate language altogether. (That's because American spelling and grammar are "incorrect", while British-style spelling and grammer are "correct".)

The two biggest failings of the vocal antiwar movement have been their clear hatred of America and their fundamental contempt for the intelligence of average Americans. Which is why there's good reason to believe that their protests have actually strengthened support for the war overall.

But it's not at all clear that the folks who have been responsible for organizing the protests actually care about the war, as such. They've been using it as an excuse to get a lot of people to come out and listen to speeches about a lot of other causes; it's been a rather blatant recruitment drive for such groups as the WWP.

Some who have been involved truly do oppose the war. But they've been suckered.

"That's because American spelling and grammar are "incorrect", while British-style spelling and grammer are 'correct'"

I'm sourry, Joe, you misspelled "grammour", "spelliung" and "Britiush".

Last I heard of the 'Anglosaxons' we were invading their shores, raping their nuns, burning their monasteries and making them pay us for the privilege.

Take out the condescension, though, and it's pretty good advice for rhetoric of any kind. Trying to explain what you mean using simple, straightforward arguments is a good way to clarify what you really believe. You can always offer to give more statistics on request.

Richard Feynman once said that if you can't give at least a qualitative explanation of a scientific concept in terms any layperson can understand, it's possible that you don't really understand it yourself. The same goes for political opinions.

In the particular case of whether there should be an invasion of Iraq, unlike many people on both sides, I think there is actually much room for disagreement among those of good and patriotic intentions. And it's at least good to see anti-war people recognize that there's a way to phrase their objections that doesn't amount to paranoid screaming about the menace of Amerikkka. The debate can only benefit from that.

With that kind of attitude il professori could be French?

With that kind of attitude il professori could be French?

Robert Fisk said the exact same thing. Remember his recent article about how the cameraman in Austin, TX told him off, and Fisk characterized him as an uneducated redneck type and said the anti-war movement wasn't reaching people like that because of the big,fancy words?

Fisk was almost right. The anti-war movement isn't reaching people like that because of the big, fancy lies.

"Strip down to the simple, metaphoric..."

Darmok and Jalad at Tenagra.

Unzani, his fist closed.

Shaka, when the walls fell.

OK, now I get it.

Here's some Anglo-Saxon for her:

Wrætlic is þes wealstan, wyrde gebræcon;
burgstede burston, brosnað enta geweorc.
Hrofas sind gehrorene, hreorge torras

...which I dedicate to the UN.

Heh heh -- I was going to do that, but I got sidetracked. Now translate? (I haven't seen an English/Anglo-Saxon translator anywhere, though Klingon-English ones abound. Now how fair is that?)

It's good to see I'm not the only one who's been reminded of that particular ST:TNG episode...

Sorry, here's the translation:

The city buildings fell apart, the works
Of giants crumble. Tumbled are the towers
Ruined the roofs, and broken the barred gate

The rest is here.

Because metaphors are so much simpler than those icky facts!

Thank you, Andrea, for the addition to my list of invective. The mental picture of "Fuck yourself sideways with a plank" is hilarious. I had never heard that one before. Ooooh, mama. That has to hurt!

I see, though, that I should have used some other word than "plank," which is Middle English by way of Old French, rather than Anglo-Saxon in origin. (I belatedly looked it up on dictionary.com.) Oh well, it's a one-syllable word anyway. Gotta keep it simple!