"I was heaping scorn on an inexcusably silly idea -- a practice I shall always follow. Anyone who clings to the historically untrue -- and thoroughly immoral -- doctrine that 'violence never settles anything' I would advice to conjure up the ghost of Napoleon Bonaparte and of the Duke of Wellington and let them debate it. The ghost of Hitler could referee, and the jury might well be the Dodo, the Great Auk, and the Passenger Pigeon. Violence, naked force, has settled more issues in history than has any factor, and the contrary opinion is wishful thinking at its worst. Breeds that forget this basic truth have always paid for it with their lives and freedoms."--Robert A. Heinlein - Starship Troopers
Also from Heinlein--
"Your enemy is never a villain in his own eyes. Keep this in mind, it may offer a way to make him your friend. If not, you can kill him without hate, and quickly."
And add to these a quote of my own choosing--
"It makes no difference what men think of war, said the judge. War endures. As well ask men what they think of stone. War was always here. Before man was, war waited for him. The ultimate trade awaiting the ultimate practitioner."--Cormac McCarthy - Blood Meridian
8 Comments:
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Starship Troopers--a must.
Glory Road--gotta have it!
I haven't read much sci-fi in years. I'd like to re-explore Heinlein and another favorite, Zelazny, a little.
But then 1984, Animal Farm, and Fahrenheit 451 are all allegorical in nature. And as allegories go, we do see relevence in today's world as drawn from these three great works of fiction.
I would highly recommend Blood Meridian, by Cormac McCarthy. It is a western unparalleled in its vision, candor, and violence. If I had to boil its theme down to a single coherent theme, "Redemption through Violence" would be that draught. It is one of the most beautiful stories I've ever read.
Cormac McCarthy is one of my favorites. Take for instance the film All the Pretty Horses. A faithful adaptation to McCarthy's novel. But as faithful as the film was, it pales horribly in comparison to the beauty of author's words. If I envy any writer their ability, it is this man.
If non-violence prevails, somehow, as America's response to Islamic thugs, Orwell is relevant. The ONLY comparisons to Orwellian society have been adopted because of the left!
That's what scares me about giving a president too much power--a leftist could become president and Orwellia will gain.
A clever use of personification there, D... Personifying a vision. I like.
“I just want you to know that, when we talk about war, we're really talking about peace.”
"Mission accomplished," meaning "We're still years away from ending this invasion"?
"Defense" meaning invading Iraq unprovoked?
A "Clear Skies" initiative that allows more polluting?
Placing Coal industry flacks in charge of protecting coal miners and operations?
Placing oil industry flacks in charge of the EPA?
The White House Council on Environmental Quality chief of staff coming from the Oil Industry and leaving the gov't and going back into the oil industry?
Placing a corporate schill in charge of the Labor cabinet?
Running as a moral person - in contrast to Clinton, supposedly - and then hiring TWO convicted felons to be on his staff?
For more on Bush's Orwellian staff:
http://www.opensecrets.org/bush/cabinet.asp
"This notion that the United States is getting ready to attack Iran is simply ridiculous. And having said that, all options are on the table."
Truly, all gov't types have their Orwellian moments but any objective look at this administration makes it seem entirely plausible that Bush read 1984 as a How-To Manual instead of an apocryphal warning against totalitarianism.
He thinks invading Iraq - even knowing that it will lead to the deaths of tens of thousands of innocents - will somehow help stop terrorism. I think that's a ludicrous position.
He truly believes (it seems) that Peace can be brought by war. That is perhaps the ultimate Orwellian statement.
Bush believes it a good thing to have corporate schills in position to be a watchdog for those corporations while most of us recognize that as a cynical bow to the people who helped pay to put him in office.
The oil industry puts about 80% of their money into Republican candidates and I think most reasonable people know that there are strings attached, expectations held by the people who give those moneys.
We want gov't by the people, not by a few people. We don't want to lose our voice. That's not an unreasonable position.
Do you not have a problem with hiring a Coal guy being the watchdog for the coal industry? With SOOO many corporate (especially oil) people being part of this administration? Do you not think that would lead to a lopsided representation?