frank miller

[Michael F]

The ad-hominem attacks don't bother me, they are the product of a lack of
conceptual thinking and speak more about the spitter rather than the
target. CNN/Foxnews modes of dialectic don't bother me.

"What qualifies you to evaluate the motives of thousands of people risking
arrest and beating, and willing to leave the comforts of indoor living all
in order to address the hypocrisy and failure of a society throwing off its
constitutional and historic values for neo-feudalist power arrangements?"

I have similar aims as most rational Americans, who are being done wrong by
our politicians and corporate-driven privateers, however, I fear that it is
irreversible and comes along with our Modern type of democracy and
capitalism(I don't think socialism or communism can cure top-level
governing irresponsibility either,as history will back me up). With that
being said, I am not a Christian: I don't blindly leap head-first into
"causes" that have been constructed by other people. The lists of names you
mentioned above are not even thinkers, but just media-selected prophets of
material. I love the way Naomi Klein and Michael Moore gain political cache
by ripping the very system that has benefitted them so tremendously.
Listening to them is kind of like reading Derrida, they want to make a
point, but they are attempting to destroy the system that allows them to
communicate and have a "position" of visilbilty and celebrity; kind of like
talking on the phone for an hour or so, but pulling out the chord 10
minutes after the conversation started and talking into a dead phone. If
all these folks are giving their lives and sacrificing their comforting
Modern luxuries, that's fine- but it doesn't mean they are going about it
the proper way or doing it efficiently. Thousands of Germans giving up
their prior religious and political traditions for Nazism didn't justify it
for those who knew better.

"Could it be Michael F who feels insecure and tries to get attention by
attacking Berkeley philosophy professors and a movement that has succeeded
in initiating a much needed nationwide conversation about the tension
between democracy and Friedman style capitalism?"

I will never hesitate to comment on the absurdity of teaching undergrads
Heidegger. As well, these guys consider themselves experts in 20th Century
German philosophy, without commenting on the likes of Carl Schmidt and Leo
Strauss and other thinkers who must be addressed.

"If you have tactical ideas which are better than those you see being used,
then maybe you should get involved and offer your ideas. Instead of mocking
David, how about Michael F squaring off against Goliath? By the way,
precise argument and overall scholastic credibility might be helped by
mastering the difference between the possessive pronoun and the adverb
spelling of their/there."

Grammar? I figure this to be a chat room, and if my writing, which
immitates our sloppy oral language comes out jumbled, I apologize.

Interesting, how you use Old Testament metaphors, I figured the movement
was "secular" and religious and secular metaphor break down after further
exploration.  As for David and Goliath, I don't consider it to be a
"masses" vs. "elites" issue, which will allow me to make my next point and
actually relate it to the title of this thread. The masses can be just as
corrupt as the elites, and this has happend throughout history as much as
elites being corrupt.

Frank Miller's narratives from his earlier writings involving Wolverine up
through Batman and finishing with Sin CIty and 300 mark the difference
between Ancient (Traditional or Pre-Modern) virtue vs. Modern Social
Contract Theories. Of course many Ancient, Traditional, or Pre-Modern
societies have many differing ideas concerning government and death.
Nietzsche was the first Modern thinker to exist inside our Modern ethos of
Philosophy to step outside recognize the difference. Unfortunately, as
Modern folks, its hard for us to step back or return to a classical mode of
existence, and of course Frank Miller knows this. However, I tend to think
Miller's narratives can be healthy if they motivate us to step back and
crawl backward like Nietzsche's "crab" and look inward at ourselves, rather
than outward to governing bodies. So, I'll respond with a "no", a political
revolution will change nothing for the better. I would suggest, like Frank
Miller's Spartans, that we a, such a highly educated, smart citizenry,
would do best to look inward at this point and do what we can in our
everday lives to stop these politicians and ceo's from incestuously raping
us. Batman and the Spartans know how faulty govening bodies can be, so
instead of rebelling or bringing them down in order to implant another
faulty governing body, they get knowledgable about the problem and possible
solutions and make change by starting with their daily lives (Batman making
personal sacrifices and the Spartans marching off to fight evil without the
support of their governing bodies). It has to start with the citizenry
making everyday changes before changes up top can occur. Getting angry and
living in the streets and cause damage doesn't change much.

The major problem: Modern democratic people cling to life, much more than a
virtuous soldier would.

The Spartans and other great Traditional bodies possessed an "its a great
day to die" attitude toward their virtues and way of life. Here in Western
Societies, we have a "we want to have our cake and eat-it-too attitude".
Moore, Klien, and the OWS protestors have the "cake" attitude, we want
change, but "not at our expense." No sacrifices are being made, we are
protesting so we don't have to make any in the future.

Mike F.

On Sat, Nov 19, 2011 at 10:25 AM, Michael Bailey <
michael.lee.bailey at gmail.com> wrote:
> Joseph, thanks for the counter-list!  I enjoy reading your viewpoint,
> which I think of as idealist, activist and compassionate and also
> aroused to anger through compassion...
>
> Just to make sure you distinguish, though, the list was mine, Michael
> B's (a person somewhat supportive in a small way to OWS and similar
> causes, and a bleeding heart liberal) - my caveats are those of a
> (mostly) sympathizer.  I believe in (most of) the New Deal, I think
> Social Security and Medicare are worth keeping, I think the Bush tax
> cuts proved that tax cuts don't help, I favor Greg Palast over Milton
> Friedman and I favor Michael Hudson's analysis over Austrian
> economics...I think Howard Roark was kind of a dork...
>
> Michael F - I think you have stronger philosophical objections to the
> OWS movement than mine, and probably different stances on the issues
> above as well as others.  I enjoy reading what I tend to think of as
> your libertarian views...
>
>
> On Fri, Nov 18, 2011 at 11:45 PM, Joseph Tracy <brook7 at sover.net> wrote:
>
>> now to your list
>> a) without a single leader many articulate leaders  and artists have
been embraced and participated eloquently: Naomi Klein, Chris Hedges,
Michael Moore, Arundhati Roy, Ry Cooder, Russel Simmons, SEIU leader Mary
Henry, Cornel West, Asmaa Mahfouz (key leader of Tahrir square revolution),
and many, many new voices powerfully addressing the gap between those with
and without a say in their lives.
>> b) but time after time it is the unconstitutional behavior and excessive
force of "authorities"that is being revealed in glaring and unflattering
light. Neverthless these young people feel wiser , more peaceful, and more
eager to work with the cops and others while not giving up their occupation
of public space, than those led by more radical elements in the 60's.  I
try to follow quaker peace methods( not that great at it), but watching the
film Burma vj has shaken my faith in the power of non-violent resistance
pretty deeply. We are far from a place where violence makes any sense,and
iam the first to argue that a violentrevolution tends to produce violent
authoritarian leaders, but sometimes a bully needs to learn the hard way
and people will protect themselves.
>> c)No doubt this is very tough and the reason I am not there though I
have been arrested  this year with vets for peace. One can also be in a
supporting role and there has been much support. The key is that paying
this price has produced a huge wave of support, disruption of the status
quo, and exposure of the widespread discontent with the Power of Wall
street and purchase of democracy. It's a creative tactic and it seems to be
unleashing new creative tactics and provoking dissenters to be creative.
>> d)Not sure I buy the idea that those who stayed in the system had the
largest effect .  Could be an interesting topic to pursue? Also  those who
did have an effect usually did not scoff at the 60s revolution but took it
to wherever they were from Dan Ellsberg to Angela Davis, to Gloria Steinem,
to Thomas Pynchon.
>>
>> One of the things I like about OWS is the importance of self education.
They have a library, assemblies, speakers, and these are important. Lot of
photos of young adults reading.
>>
>> My thoughts on OWS, 350.org, Democracy Now, Alternet, Michael Moore, the
various components of the world wide anti-war and human justice movement.
THIS IS IT. THIS IS WHAT YOU REALLY HAVE TO CHANGE DIRECTION . This is the
hope that Obama promised but failed to occupy. Both parties work for
international corporate interests and the Military. The differences are
trivial. THIS IS THE REMNANTS OF DEMOCRACY IN THE US.
>>
>> On Nov 18, 2011, at 4:53 PM, Michael Bailey wrote:
>>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://waste.org/pipermail/pynchon-l/attachments/20111119/03eb8ef0/attachment.html>