|
Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
moosehead
Joined: 05 May 2007
|
 Posted: Thu May 29, 2008 5:11 am Post subject: |
 |
|
wow - I don't even know where to begin to address such nonsense and propaganda - clearly you're so far on the dark side you couldn't see the light if it was shining in your face.
perhaps you could explain the current food crisis - the one that's global?
or I'll keep it simple - how about the one in Haiti? having to do with subsidized agriculture having devastated Haiti's production?
the world is safer?? where on earth do you live that you feel safe?!!
the ME is a total mess right now - and threats towards Iran increase every day; even Jimmy Carter can't hold back any more and is speaking out about Israel - the U.S. just flew over Venezuela a few days ago antagonizing them even more - Somalia is burning and is lighting the tinderbox next to Kenya - the U.S. has millions of illegal immigrants and doesn't know how to even begin to address the problem of where they all are and what to do about them -
as for a drop in global terrorism - what the F*CK do you call invading Iraq?? that's one of the WORST cases of terrorism ever!!
Bush and cronies are war criminals and responsible for the deaths of hundreds of thousands of innocent civilians - that's men, women and children - not to mention the downfall of the Republic -
but yes, you are right about one thing - the wealthy do get wealthier
let's see now -
Halliburton
Bechtel
Exxon
Chevron
Royal Dutch Petroleum
Blackwater et al.
the Carlyle Group
etc etc etc....  |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
mises
Joined: 05 Nov 2007
Location: retired
|
| Posted: Thu May 29, 2008 8:22 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
| perhaps you could explain the current food crisis - the one that's global? |
The global food crises, which isn't a crises but a small problem, is the result of 2 droughts (Ukraine and Aus), the push to bio-fuels, an expansion in global money supply (to many dollars chasing to few goods) but most of all the rapid increase in incomes in Asia. Asians can afford to buy more. This is a good thing. Now, we have to get Africa and Asian agriculture industrialized to the point that the yields can more than support life.
| Quote: |
or I'll keep it simple - how about the one in Haiti? having to do with subsidized agriculture having devastated Haiti's production?
|
Haiti is an interesting case. It shows us clearly that all famines are man-made. Haiti shares an island with another country. Is DR having a food crises? Why not?
| Quote: |
| the world is safer?? where on earth do you live that you feel safe?!! |
Statistically, everywhere, as the report said, less Iraq. Do you read? Can you read? Read.
| Quote: |
the ME is a total mess right now - and threats towards Iran increase every day; even Jimmy Carter can't hold back any more and is speaking out about Israel
|
And? When has it not been? The report showed that deaths from terrorism decreased. Carter has always been critical of Israel. He is also perhaps the most naive man to ever sit in the White House (including Bush).
| Quote: |
| - the U.S. just flew over Venezuela a few days ago antagonizing them even more |
It was a small plane. No harm done. The pilot apologized and the world moved on. Why can't your little mind do the same?
| Quote: |
- Somalia is burning and is lighting the tinderbox next to Kenya |
-
Do you know your recent African history? Do you know what the word "history" means? When we say something is safer "now" we are comparing it to "not now", which due to our limits of perception means "back then". What do you know about "back then" in Africa? Have you gone and counted all the conflicts/wars per year for the last 80 years? The people who made the report have, and their findings are very positive. Not perfect, but positive.
| Quote: |
the U.S. has millions of illegal immigrants and doesn't know how to even begin to address the problem of where they all are and what to do about them - |
This has what to do with what?
| Quote: |
as for a drop in global terrorism - what the F*CK do you call invading Iraq?? that's one of the WORST cases of terrorism ever!! |
I call it an unprovoked war. If you want to define terrorism to include war, then go ahead. There is much, much less war and terrorism today than in recent history as well. Do you know about history?
| Quote: |
Bush and cronies are war criminals and responsible for the deaths of hundreds of thousands of innocent civilians - that's men, women and children - not to mention the downfall of the Republic -
|
The Republic has fallen?
| Quote: |
| but yes, you are right about one thing - the wealthy do get wealthier |
Actually, what we have seen is wealth creation and the expansion of the middle class at a scale and pace unseen before in human history. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
doc_ido
Joined: 03 Sep 2007
|
| Posted: Thu May 29, 2008 4:32 pm Post subject: Re: The Klein Doctrine: The Rise of Disaster Polemics |
|
|
| Quote: |
| Friedman's own words reveal him to be an advocate of peace, democracy, and individual rights. |
Probably tells you everything you need to know about Johan. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Kuros
Joined: 27 Apr 2004
|
| Posted: Thu May 29, 2008 5:30 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| moosehead wrote: |
| wow - I don't even know where to begin to address such nonsense and propaganda - |
Your inability to do so is made very clear by the rest of your post.
| moosehead wrote: |
| the world is safer?? where on earth do you live that you feel safe?!! |
Hysterics are no substitute for evidence showing that there are more global conflicts today than 30 years ago.
| moosehead wrote: |
| even Jimmy Carter can't hold back any more and is speaking out about Israel |
'Even Jimmy Carter?' Does this man have a reputation for being reluctant to give his opinion? I don't think so.
| moosehead wrote: |
| as for a drop in global terrorism - what the F*CK do you call invading Iraq?? that's one of the WORST cases of terrorism ever!! |
GAH! IRAQ!!
| moosehead wrote: |
Halliburton
Bechtel
Exxon
Chevron
Royal Dutch Petroleum
Blackwater et al.
the Carlyle Group |
Why is the Carlyle Group on that list? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
moosehead
Joined: 05 May 2007
|
| Posted: Thu May 29, 2008 6:39 pm Post subject: |
|
|
it's absolutely amazing that a forum with allegedly college-educated professionals on it can have so much narrow-mindedness, rightwing conservatism, racism, misogynism and a host of other facist terror-minded Modedit doing nothing better with their time than ModEdit with other people's lives.
one can't help but wonder if someone pays you to come on here and spread your disinformation and meager attempts at discrediting those of us who actually know the truth, understand the social justice movements going forward and making progress in the world.
oh yes, you will grasp, strangle and thrash about with your dying breath as any drowning person would do, as you attempt to pull down the last semblance of libertarian thought, of progressive ideas, even as you go down, drowning in your own self-righteous alternate reality of white-wing-rightwing christian extremism.
rest assured, I will not be sucked into your game. it doesn't work that way.
you are not interested in debate but only spreading your own propagandized ModEdit.
in other words: go ModEdit yourself. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mises
Joined: 05 Nov 2007
Location: retired
|
| Posted: Thu May 29, 2008 8:33 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Hell, well I'm convinced. The world IS getting more dangerous, despite the evidence. I'm now clear of the "narrow-mindedness, rightwing conservatism, racism, misogynist and a host of other fascist terror-minded f*ckheads" (spelling corrected).
Where do I write in Chomsky on ballots? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mises
Joined: 05 Nov 2007
Location: retired
|
| Posted: Thu May 29, 2008 9:11 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| moosehead wrote: |
one can't help but wonder if someone pays you to come on here and spread your disinformation and meager attempts at discrediting those of us who actually know the truth, understand the social justice movements going forward and making progress in the world.
|
How did I miss that? Also, whom do I contact to get paid for my ramblings on Dave's ESL Cafe? I never knew I was the architect of a strategic agenda..
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Kuros
Joined: 27 Apr 2004
|
| Posted: Thu May 29, 2008 11:10 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| moosehead wrote: |
the world is safer?? where on earth do you live that you feel safe?!!
the ME is a total mess right now - and threats towards Iran increase every day; even Jimmy Carter can't hold back any more and is speaking out about Israel - the U.S. just flew over Venezuela a few days ago antagonizing them even more - Somalia is burning and is lighting the tinderbox next to Kenya - the U.S. has millions of illegal immigrants and doesn't know how to even begin to address the problem of where they all are and what to do about them -
as for a drop in global terrorism - what the F*CK do you call invading Iraq?? that's one of the WORST cases of terrorism ever!! |
Here's Fareed Zakaria explaining how terrorism has dropped, precipitously so.
| Quote: |
| The Simon Fraser study notes that the decline in terrorism appears to be caused by many factors, among them successful counterterrorism operations in dozens of countries and infighting among terror groups. But the most significant, in the study's view, is the "extraordinary drop in support for Islamist terror organizations in the Muslim world over the past five years." These are largely self-inflicted wounds. The more people are exposed to the jihadists' tactics and world view, the less they support them. An ABC/BBC poll in Afghanistan in 2007 showed support for the jihadist militants in the country to be 1 percent. In Pakistan's North-West Frontier province, where Al Qaeda has bases, support for Osama bin Laden plummeted from 70 percent in August 2007 to 4 percent in January 2008. That dramatic drop was probably a reaction to the assassination of Bena-zir Bhutto, but it points to a general trend in Pakistan over the past five years. With every new terrorist attack, public support for jihad falls. "This pattern is repeated in country after country in the Muslim world," writes Mack. "Its strategic implications are critically important because historical evidence suggests that terrorist campaigns that lose public support will sooner or later be abandoned or defeated." |
Jihadism is sputtering out. I guess the Jihadists have targetted too many Muslims, as Joo continually points out.
| Quote: |
| Why have you not heard about studies like this or the one from Simon Fraser, which was done by highly regarded scholars, released at the United Nations and widely discussed in many countries around the world-from Canada to Australia? Because it does not fit into the narrative of fear that we have all accepted far too easily. |
So, Moosehead, why are you regurgitating all the propaganda fed to us by the powers at be? Are you a right-wing idealogue, too? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mises
Joined: 05 Nov 2007
Location: retired
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 21, 2008 9:45 am Post subject: |
|
|
More about NK from this 10-page review in TNR:
http://www.tnr.com/politics/story.html?id=69067f1c-d089-474b-a8a0-945d1deb420b&p=1
| Quote: |
Klein's relentless materialism is not the only thing driving her to see conservatives merely as corporate puppets. She pays shockingly (but, given her premises, unsurprisingly) little attention to right-wing ideas. She recognizes that neoconservatism sits at the heart of the Iraq war project, but she does not seem to know what neoconservatism is; and she makes no effort to find out. Her ignorance of the American right is on bright display in one breathtaking sentence:
| Quote: |
| Only since the mid-nineties has the intellectual movement, led by the right-wing think-tanks with which [Milton] Friedman had long associations--Heritage Foundation, Cato Institute and the American Enterprise Institute--called itself "neoconservative," a worldview that has harnessed the full force of the U.S. military machine in the service of a corporate agenda. |
Where to begin? First, neoconservative ideology dates not from the 1990s but from the 1960s, and the label came into widespread use in the 1970s. Second, while neoconservatism is highly congenial to corporate interests, it is distinctly less so than other forms of conservatism. The original neocons, unlike traditional conservatives, did not reject the New Deal. They favor what they now call "national greatness" over small government. And their foreign policy often collides head-on with corporate interests: neoconservatives favor saber-rattling in places such as China or the Middle East, where American corporations frown on political risk, and favor open relations and increased trade. Moreover, the Heritage Foundation has always had an uneasy relationship with neoconservatism. (Russell Kirk delivered a famous speech at the Heritage Foundation in which he declared that "not seldom has it seemed as if some eminent neoconservatives mistook Tel Aviv for the capital of the United States.") And the Cato Institute is not neoconservative at all. It was virulently opposed to the Iraq war in particular, and it opposes interventionism in foreign policy in general.
Finally, there is the central role that Klein imputes to her villain Friedman, both in this one glorious passage and throughout her book. In her telling, he is the intellectual guru of the shock doctrine, whose minions have carried out his corporatist agenda from Santiago to Baghdad. Klein calls the neocon movement "Friedmanite to the core," and identifies the Iraq war as a "careful and faithful application of unrestrained Chicago School ideology" over which Friedman presided. What she does not mention--not once, not anywhere, in her book--is that Friedman argued against the Iraq war from the beginning, calling it an act of "aggression."
|
Seldom is a book taken down as systematically as has hers. If she reads these reviews (and she may not, as it is clear she doesn't read her intellectual opposites..or understand them) she will be highly embarrassed and ashamed. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Kuros
Joined: 27 Apr 2004
|
| Posted: Tue Jul 22, 2008 1:12 am Post subject: |
|
|
But that's the beauty of it! Jonathan Chait is a LIBERAL. Naomi Klein may actually read this guy. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
On the other hand
Joined: 19 Apr 2003
Location: I walk along the avenue
|
| Posted: Tue Jul 22, 2008 8:13 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
| But that's the beauty of it! Jonathan Chait is a LIBERAL. Naomi Klein may actually read this guy. |
Maybe. But in my experience, most leftists who are familiar with the New Republic regard the magazine with utter contempt, largely(though not exclusively) because of its pro-Israel bias. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mises
Joined: 05 Nov 2007
Location: retired
|
| Posted: Sun Dec 07, 2008 10:05 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
A key paragraph from the new New Yorker piece on Naomi Klein [emphasis mine]:
ut now that a shock had shaken Washington itself, something slightly different seemed to be going on. On the one hand, the initial reaction to the economic crisis followed her theory�the shock (the bank failures and the market�s nosedive) had inspired the government to attempt to seize unprecedented power (seven hundred billion dollars with no strings attached), claiming that in such a crisis everyone should simply trust it to do the right thing, even though the actions it wanted to take would seem to enrich the wealthiest at the expense of everybody else. That was the textbook part. But the plan wasn�t working. Constituents wrote thousands of outraged letters, and bloggers wrote about how this felt familiar, like the aftermath of September 11th, and how the bailout was the economic equivalent of the Patriot Act. It was just as she had written at the end of the book: memory was shock�s antidote. (Another difference, of course, was that the government wanted to enact not Friedman-style reforms but the opposite: enormous interference in the market. Still, since the point of this interference was to bail out banks, this difference did not strike Klein as of much importance.)
Well, sure. Why should it be important to someone who devoted a long book to attacking Milton Friedman whether or not he actually would have supported the things she is blaming him for? And why should she care that plenty of Friedmanite conservatives and libertarians were among the outraged class warriors who opposed the bailout (and, for that matter, the Patriot Act)?
Ever since The Shock Doctrine came out, Klein has spent about 15 hours a day dismissing these little "differences that do not strike her of much importance"�which is to say, denying the existence of large groups of highly vocal intellectuals whose existence is inconvenient for her post-Cold-War fairy tale. Even sympathetic commentators have felt obliged to point out, though without putting it so plainly, that her thesis is ass-backwards and that an undergraduate paper which misrepresented its subject as carelessly as she misrepresents Friedman would inevitably be given a failing grade. (This is the kind of thing people say about bad books all the time, but it's really true in this case: Klein, who is now sometimes referred to by interviewers as an "economist", could not possibly pass a proper history-of-economic-thought seminar in which she submitted her book as the term paper�at least not without tightening the bolts on her argument very considerably indeed.)
What's interesting about Larissa MacFarquhar's article is that it leaves no doubt that Klein is basically a bored, restless adolescent who lacks the attention span to formulate a coherent political philosophy and has succeeded mostly by conveying to a young generation of wannabe radicals (whose record of political accomplishment, compiled and added up, wouldn't outweigh a single one of Milton Friedman's sentences against military conscription) that lack of rigour isn't anything to be ashamed of in the groovy 21st century. Yet it's not clear that MacFarquhar is aware of this or would even agree with the assessment. |
http://network.nationalpost.com/np/blogs/fullcomment/archive/2008/12/07/colby-cosh-naomi-klein-wrong-but-wrespectable.aspx
I love that this book is still being trashed. I saw Klein speak a few weeks back and she had to dodge more questions than Bill Clinton. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mises
Joined: 05 Nov 2007
Location: retired
|
| Posted: Sat Aug 22, 2009 1:17 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Klein advocating disaster socialism:
| Quote: |
| Do we want to save the pre-crisis system, get it back to where it was last September? Or do we want to use this crisis, and the electoral mandate for change delivered by the last election, to radically transform that system? We need to get clear on our answer now because we haven�t had the potent combination of a serious crisis and a clear progressive democratic mandate for change since the 1930s. We use this opportunity or we lose it. |
http://www.progressive.org/klein0809.html |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
