NP? modernity, terrorism, truth and relevance?

[alice wellintown]

Blonde on Blonde? He looks like a young Dylan. Not like those Central Park
Five Boyz.

He'd look swell with a mouth harp and a guitar, singing, "Send me to the
Lectric Chair".


On Mon, Apr 22, 2013 at 6:27 PM, <malignd at aol.com> wrote:

> <<I think many agree- physically, he's not hard to look at.>>
>
>  He's a murderer but hey! he's cute!  And sociable!  Cut the kid some
> slack!
>
>  <<Men, in general, are more prone to aggression and violence, much of
> that due testosterone.>>
>
>  Who knew?
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: bandwraith <bandwraith at aol.com>
> To: pynchon-l <pynchon-l at waste.org>
> Sent: Sun, Apr 21, 2013 6:14 pm
> Subject: Re: NP? modernity, terrorism, truth and relevance?
>
>  Dzhokhar is especially troubling and difficult to understand. I think
> many agree- physically, he's not hard to look at. From what I've read and
> heard, he's bright and sociable. He seemed to have alot going for him.
> Maybe there is more about him that will come out. Until then, it's an
> enigma.
>
> Men, in general, are more prone to aggression and violence, much of that
> due testosterone. It's tough to say whether background checks would have
> been useful in this case, but they might have been, given the older
> brother's encounter with the FBI. Of course, that's part of the reason why
> extremists of any stripe are resisting them.
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: kelber <kelber at mindspring.com>
> To: pynchon-l <pynchon-l at waste.org>
> Sent: Sun, Apr 21, 2013 4:57 pm
> Subject: Re: NP? modernity, terrorism, truth and relevance?
>
>  It's much easier politically to connect the Boston Marathon bombers with
> al Qaeda-style terrorism, than to connect them to the mentally ill (i.e.
> without apparent ideology) gunmen from Columbine to Newton. But surely
> young men who amass huge arsenals of weapons, for whatever reason, must
> have some psychological similarities.
>
>  Laura
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: bandwraith at aol.com
> Sent: Apr 21, 2013 4:48 PM
> To: pynchon-l at waste.org
> Subject: Re: NP? modernity, terrorism, truth and relevance?
>
>  Interesting. The motives and methods of Al Qaeda could certainly use
> better explanation then I, at least, have been able to come across. It's
> been sort of like the caution not to speculate on the motives and
> rationales of Hitler for fear of making him appear sympathetic, or at least
> human. Get more mileage from a Defense and National Security funding
> perspective by painting Al Qaeda as pure evil- beyond understanding, rather
> than trying to understand them, which might lead to counter strategies
> that actually work. But my liberal skirt is showing...
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: rich <richard.romeo at gmail.com>
> To: Bandwraith at aol.com <bandwraith at aol.com>
> Cc: “pynchon-l at waste.or
> g“ <pynchon-l at waste.org>
> Sent: Sun, Apr 21, 2013 3:54 pm
> Subject: Re: NP? modernity, terrorism, truth and relevance?
>
>  john gray wrote an interesting book on al aqaeda
>
>  here's a reviewers description of relevance from the Independent
>
> How, then, can al-Qa'ida be "modern", or Western-influenced? John Gray
> explains that it is "a by-product of globalisation ... Its most distinctive
> feature – projecting a privatised form of organised violence worldwide –
> was impossible in the past. Equally, the belief that a new world can be
> hastened by spectacular acts of destruction is nowhere found in medieval
> times. Al Qaeda's closest precursors are the revolutionary anarchists of
> late 19th-century Europe".
> Gray continues, "Though it claims to be anti-Western, radical Islam is
> shaped as much by Western ideology as Islamic traditions. Like Marxists and
> neoliberals, radical Islamists see history as a prelude to a new world. All
> are convinced they can remake the human condition... [Soviet Communism,
> National Socialism and radical Islam] have all been described as assaults
> on the West. In reality, each of these three projects is best understood as
> an attempt to realise a modern European ideal" – that is, to use a central,
> state authority to reorder human societies according to knowable principles
> (no matter how insane they might be).
>
>
>
> On Sun, Apr 21, 2013 at 3:05 PM, <bandwraith at aol.com> wrote:
>
>> I agree. These issues are complex and morally challenging, and require
>> work to sort out. It's not just a matter of the politically expedient: "The
>> enemy of my enemy is my friend," for example, is not necessarily true.
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: kelber <kelber at mindspring.com>
>> To: pynchon-l <pynchon-l at waste.org>
>> Sent: Sun, Apr 21, 2013 10:47 am
>> Subject: Re: NP? modernity, terrorism, truth and relevance?
>>
>> What's stupid? The idea that there can be many disparate reasons to oppose
>> modernity, in its latest incarnation - the megacorporation?  I didn't say that
>> pacifists and al Qaeda, or that feminists and religious fundamentalists are
>> comrades-in-arms - they can't be. But in a world where nation-states are going
>> bankrupt, where Nature (water, the genetic code) is being privatized, where
>> formerly democratic bodies are being bought off, where slavery (sex slaves,
>> child labor, prison labor immigrant internment camps) is a significant
>> contributor to world "prosperity," there are bound to be some strange bedfellows
>> in opposition. Who's opposed to sex slavery, for example? Feminists and
>> religious fundamentalists who think women should be kept veiled and locked up.
>>
>> Laura
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> >From: alice wellintown <alicewellintown at gmail.com>
>> >Sent: Apr 21, 2013 8:51 AM
>> >To: pynchon -l <pynchon-l at waste.org>
>> >Subject: Re: NP? modernity, terrorism, truth and relevance?
>> >
>> >Wha?
>> >
>> >You can't be serious. This is stupid.
>> >
>> >> On the other side, all those who hate the Globocracy: political progressives
>> >> (who can get confused, because they're fighting against people who support
>> >> many of the progressive issues they feel most passionate about),
>> >> environmentalists, supporters of human rights, pacifists, humanists,
>> >> Christian wingnuts, fascists, rightwing nationalists, Muslim
>> >> fundamentalists, Orthodox Jews, and racists and hate-mongerers of all
>> >> stripes. Much as I loathe who's lumped into this side, it's the side I most
>> >> support. It's clearly the losing side. Pynchon, with his romanticizing of
>> >> indigenous cultures, his disgust at colonialism, clearly falls into this
>> >> side.
>>
>>
>>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://waste.org/pipermail/pynchon-l/attachments/20130422/f27e9ae9/attachment.html>