rant and ramble

a picture speaks

2007-01-23T15:53:00.000-08:00

suffice it to speak that if this woman wins, i'm leaving the country. strange that i just started reading Witness ...

light enough to laugh

2007-01-16T10:56:00.000-08:00

for your amusement and enjoyment, i thought i would share this brilliant little sketch with y'all, in keeping with the present debate on the current political situation.

the ideal candidate

2007-01-10T11:44:00.000-08:00

+
the ideal solution was presented to me by a good friend. i encourage everyone to visit his site.

captain baghead wrote:
Jaime. Have you been skipping classes? That would be like you. I just want to urge you to start walking the"straight and narrow" in 2007.
Also, vote Macgyver in 2008. --Captain Baghead

gipsy to captain baghead:

captain. i am so grateful to you for solving my election difficulties! now i will be able to vote in good conscience. truly, this is the solution.
hope to make it to F-town asap, hopefully in a green jeep with some guy and a helper monkey. pax.
~j

curious

2006-12-29T09:23:00.000-08:00

i was asking a coworker how a population could be "growing" if two people were only having one child to replace both of them. she said "let's not think to hard about this, now." curious ... am editing a lesson originally entitled "human population explosion." changed it to "growth," but this idea that mankind is a sort of pestilence on the Earth i find very disturbing. i vote that all those viewing humanity as a nuisance volunteer to exterminate themselves. just kidding: death is never the answer. curious again, that death doesn't solve everything, seeing as the only alternative is to live and do something with your life.

i suppose it's just very selfish. i will not get started on how modern civilisation has raped the earth. how can people be a pestilence and not strip malls and condominiums?

fate of the blog

2006-12-27T05:10:00.000-08:00

poor rant & ramble! sorely neglected by all, including me.
right before we left for Christmas, my roommate and i started digging into the democracy issue. here is my question: distrubutism, for instance, is great in theory. how practical it would be in practice, i'm not really sure. every time i get into this discussion, people like to tell me how great capitalism and democracy are because they allow for all these great opportunities etc. i'm sure that is true in theory, but look at what it has created in reality: a nation of consumers, who don't know or care what they are buying as long as they are buying something, completely absorbed in obtaining material goods at the cost of the nation's welfare or the producer's welfare or the earth's welfare. i realize any system of government is going to have corruption: that is the problem with trying to find an ideal government. but part of the reason i hate michigan is because my hometown, detroit, has been the victim of such mayors as coleman young and kwami kirkpatrick, who are more concerned with lining their pockets, who have obviously fixed the votes, who have systematically destroyed and continue to destroy the architecture, artistic mastery, character, history, and soul of detroit to sell out to mundane second-rate quick fixes that will bring quick easy money. it is one of the most horrible and shameful things i have seen of its kind. similar things happen around the country, i've no doubt. not to even get started on the food industry ...
so i don't know what the answer or what the balance is. if we're going to talk about how things play out in actual practice, i am far from convinced that democracy OR capitalism have given a very stellar performance run, at least as implemented in america.
on that note ...
Merry Christmas!

Warning from history . . .

2006-11-25T19:32:00.000-08:00

Here's a little video I came across. It's really old and cheesy, but I think it fits the current discussion.

Warning From History!
Uploaded by lulu7777

Democracy and fallen nature

2006-10-19T14:50:00.000-07:00

For the record, I don't remember what the wording on the picture means; I just thought that it fit the motif of the discussion.

Completely agree with you about the problems of members of the Catholic bubble not getting involved in art and politics. A large reason why these areas have become so corrupt is likely the result of this paranoia which was caused -- not by any Catholic teaching -- but by the heresies of the Puritanism and Jansenism which influences the American Christian, and even Catholic attitudes towards art and culture. Such scrupulosity is not at all consistent with Catholicism, and yet Catholics are often accused of this. Catholics, real Catholics who actually practice their faith, are the ones who need to change this attitude in society.

Original sin has caused us to have more difficulty in choosing what is right, first because we lost our preternatural understanding of natural law, and secondly because pride became part of our nature. This does not mean that we are incapable of choosing for ourselves, however, nor does it imply that God in any way wants us to not have the freedom to choose for ourselves -- that's the very meaning of free will. Moreover, if we are deemed incapable to choose for ourselves, who chooses for us? Another fallen human being? No thank you! What makes ANY leader, regardless of their religious upbringing, education, whatever, ANY leader less susceptible to original sin than anyone else? He is given special grace from God as a leader, it is true; nevertheless, he is arguably more susceptible to corruption because he is given power over an entire country. Even under a leader God still expects us to choose for ourselves.

There is one crucial difference between communism and democracy. Communism is based on the idea that, so long as a society is constructed properly, there will be no evil -- eventually. Democracy, on the other hand, was constructed with the understanding that human beings are fallen and corruptible, regardless of the high quality of society; the checks and balances of a democratic system automatically assume this. It is not the Utopian, unrealistic, godless ideas that communism posits to be the cure of the evils of the world; the democratic setup admits that man is subject to corruption, and probably always will be (in this life), period. The very fact that our leaders can be elected every year in itself implies that the founders of our country believed that even the most noble leader can become corrupt regardless of how well the society is constructed.

Communism, moreover, is based on the belief of evolution; if we mold people by forcing materialism out of them, they will eventually no longer be materialistic; the survival of the fittest theory kicks in, and man becomes more than he has ever been. On the other hand, Democracy is based on the belief that the intellect and will are what determine our actions, our choices, and our dignity as creatures of God. Communism plays God; Democracy in its very construction demonstrates an understanding that it is impossible for man to play God. Unlike the "bevy of high sounding, noble ideals" that is the atheistic utopia of Communism, which is founded on the premise that man does not gain dignity from God but from society, the ideals of democracy gain their nobility from the fact that they are actually consistent with Catholic teaching in regards to fallen nature, and recognizes that mankind is made in God's image and likeness, and therefore has enough God-given dignity to make his own choices when it comes to how he wants to feed his family.

Yes, the American government is corrupt. However, the abuses of industry, the moral decay, the corruption, the poverty, all occurred when our government started to become socialist, around 1905 (give or take a few years). In other words, the majority started to have less control. Coincidence?

easy way out

2006-10-18T13:57:00.000-07:00

short, long overdue response:

due to original sin, general human nature has a curious reluctance to choose what is best for itself beyond a personal, selfish level. the testimonial can be seen in american politics.

query: it seems often to be the Catholic bubble idea that one should refrain from art and politics because they have made themselves amoral. however, if only the corrupt and licentious folks entering these arenas, how are they ever going to change? or should we just watch in superiority as we, secure in our own salvation, watch everything else go to hell in a hand-basket?

theoretically, communism has a bevy of high sounding, noble ideals. due to fallen human nature, it is virtually impossible to actually implement. i pose the same idea in regards to democracy.

What about democracy?

2006-09-26T17:29:00.000-07:00

We have buried the putrid corpse of liberty."
~Benito Mussolini

Jump'n right in, ain't we, Miss Gipsy? You know me too well.:) Going back to Gipsy's Notion about democracy (sorry it took me so long to respond). I had another response to this post, but I had to shorten it. Hopefully my response at least somewhat does what it's supposed to do . . .

I think that artists always have a difficult time accepting almost any form of government, ultimately, because whenever any form of power is involved, the ideals of the world are inevitably put in jeopardy. The devil, being one who's very fall was the result of a jealousy of power, is the master manipulator when it comes to it. Authority and guidance are necessary for a wholesome society to flourish, but for this reason, they are always always at risk.

By allowing the government to make decisions rather than allowing the people to have some say in the matter is by definition a big, controlling government. I agree that it is vital have a leader, and to ensure that those who do lead are educated and fit to lead, but how are the leaders to be chosen? By the educated upperclass? What happens when the ratio of those who are deemed educated by the leaders slips to the side of atheists and liberals? Would there not be canidates who are more than qualified to lead who would be rejected? Societies and civilizations have swayed back and forth between Christian culture and pure paganism, simply because the devil knows how to infiltrate whatever good thing society has to offer.

The hope that democracy brings is the hope of evangelizing the voting majority back to Christ when society slips the other way, without the messy alternative of having to use pitchforks to overthrow the government. Moreover, sometimes the most formally educated are the most disconnected from reality (I've known way too many intellectuals in my life to know that most of them don't know what the heck is going on half the time). A democratic system opens the doors for whoever is fit to rule. Yes, lemons have weaseled their way in, but that's also more than true for virtually every other form of government.

That is an interesting quote by Carlyle. I do not know much about him, so I can't really respond in depth. However, democracy does not make having a leader impossible. In fact, if anything it gives us hope. Can you imagine if we were stuck with Clinton for the next twenty years? With all of his faults, Bush is at least nudging us, if only ever so slightly, in the right direction.

One thing to remember, though, is this: usually when someone says that capitalism and democracy violate an ideal (with the exception of the Distributists, who well-meaningly bought into the Communist propaganda of the time -- but that's another day:)), they are saying this because otherwise they wouldn't be able to convince anyone to give everything they owned to the government. "Freedom, wealth, ownership lead to materialism, because human beings have no ability to chose not to be materialistic: if you give up all material goods, we will end all of the evils in the world. Just give us your credit card #."

Alright, I have finally answered. Go, Gipsy, go!

too many ancients in my head

2006-09-25T12:04:00.000-07:00

philosophers reason from the specific to the universal. if that is the case, it is normal to reason from our own experiences on the nature of things. if one, then, has consistently bad experiences from jews, one becomes hitler. if one has consistently bad relationships, one becomes at the least, skeptical and wary, to bitter or downright hateful of love, vulnerability, intimacey etc.

i suppose, then, the important thing is to be balanced by comparing one's own experiences to others', and to ultimately check them against Christ.

just a thought ...

also, i have something to confess (thank God the philosphers will not hear of this or i would be eating some seriously humble pie): plato is hysterical, and i have been referencing lots of aristotle. (clenching eyes closed and hanging head)

notion in my head

2006-09-10T15:19:00.000-07:00

excellent quote indeed, blogger in crime. and too, too true, i can guarantee.

so let's get this thing kicked off! and i have just the thing ...

i have some shocking news: i was talking politics the other night!!!! okay, to be more specific, a PoliSci major asked what a lit student's views on politics might be, so i proceeded to enlighten him. i started with the basics: i agree with Aristotle, for a change, that democracy is one of the worst forms of government because the rule will inevitably descend to the lowest common denominator. and, while i do not agree with carlyle in most things, i do think he put it admirably: "democracy, which means despair of finding any Heroes to govern you, and contented with putting up with the want of them." (past and present: democracy). i won't go into any more just now, as i usually start mild riots when i say this much.

so, green girl, riot away!

"Hairy legs are your only link to reality"

2006-09-09T18:18:00.000-07:00

One of my favorite quotes from one of my favorite movies, Return to Me.

While I do love my other blog, it can be very lonely being the only one in charge. Thank you, Gipsy, for the wonderful idea! And it's always good to have a place to ramble on, and on, and no one can tell you to go aware (they can just hit the back button).

Come back and visit! Don't worry, we're not going ramble about our bad toenail days or anything (unless they're philosophical toenails). Ciao all!

GreenGirl

all mirth and no matter

2006-09-09T11:21:00.000-07:00

so, here goes ... greengirl and i decided to team up on this new little blog here because we missed our office debates to much. we're not really sure what's going to happen, but we're hoping to make it a forum of sorts on any intelligent or at least intelligible subject.
"spare driver" is from waugh's vile bodies, now better known as the movie bright young things. dame agatha runcible "is the spare driver. it says so on my arm."
so welcome one and all!