|
|
|
|
Chippewa
SFN Regular
USA
1496 Posts |
 Posted - 09/28/2004 : 00:18:31
|
Noted author, E.L. Doctorow on President George Bush. Superbly written, insightful and sadly true. I hope Senator John Kerry looks into the camera during the upcoming debate, and says something like this:
http://www.easthamptonstar.com/20040909/col5.htm
|
|
|
H. Humbert
SFN Die Hard
USA
4574 Posts |
Posted - 09/28/2004 : 00:49:40 [Permalink]
|
I liked that and pretty much agree with everything the guy wrote except this:
quote:
"...but to endorse the kind of tribal combat that originated with the Neanderthals, a people, now extinct, who could imagine ensuring their survival by no other means than pre-emptive war."
Since when is the prevailing theory that Neanderthals doomed themselves to extinction through "pre-emptive" conflict? I though Homo Sapiens out competed/interbred them out of existence. Was this ever a prevailing theory? Perhaps he's referencing an older popular notion?
Anyway, good read. That just sort of jumped off the page at me though.
|
"A man is his own easiest dupe, for what he wishes to be true he generally believes to be true." --Demosthenes
"The first principle is that you must not fool yourself - and you are the easiest person to fool." --Richard P. Feynman
"Face facts with dignity." --found inside a fortune cookie |
| Edited by - H. Humbert on 09/28/2004 00:50:37 |
 |
|
|
filthy
SFN Die Hard
USA
14408 Posts |
Posted - 09/28/2004 : 02:00:32 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by H. Humbert
I liked that and pretty much agree with everything the guy wrote except this:
quote:
"...but to endorse the kind of tribal combat that originated with the Neanderthals, a people, now extinct, who could imagine ensuring their survival by no other means than pre-emptive war."
Since when is the prevailing theory that Neanderthals doomed themselves to extinction through "pre-emptive" conflict? I though Homo Sapiens out competed/interbred them out of existence. Was this ever a prevailing theory? Perhaps he's referencing an older popular notion?
Anyway, good read. That just sort of jumped off the page at me though.
It is indeed a good read, as is most everything Doctorow writes.
As for the Neandertal comment, well, the guy's not a paeolanthropologist, after all. I think he made his point well, even though tribal warfare was probably a part of hominid life well before our ancient cousins came into existance. Although there's no evidence for it, yet, he might have been more accurate if he'd written; Australopithicus, rather than Neanderthal.
But then how many of his readers are familiar with Australopithicus and keep track of the studies?
I think it is probable that Neandertal died out for a variety of reasons, including tribal warfare (we are a bloody species like none other), a shortage of resources due to having to share ice age lands with the more competitive Cro Magnon, and so forth.
This latter story is told in their rspective tool kits. Neandertal's was simpler and remained pretty much the same (as known thus far), whereas Cro Magnon's showed diversity and more sophistication.
I hope I haven't hijacked this thread.
Edited to add that I become more convinced each day that Bush is a raging sociopath.
 |
"What luck for rulers that men do not think." -- Adolf Hitler (1889 - 1945)
"If only we could impeach on the basis of criminal stupidity, 90% of the Rethuglicans and half of the Democrats would be thrown out of office." ~~ P.Z. Myres
"The default position of human nature is to punch the other guy in the face and take his stuff." ~~ Dude
Brother Boot Knife of Warm Humanitarianism,
and Crypto-Communist! 
|
| Edited by - filthy on 09/28/2004 02:07:27 |
|
|
|
Chippewa
SFN Regular
USA
1496 Posts |
Posted - 09/28/2004 : 11:35:21 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by filthy
quote:
Originally posted by H. Humbert
I liked that and pretty much agree with everything the guy wrote except this:
"...but to endorse the kind of tribal combat that originated with the Neanderthals, a people, now extinct..."
Anyway, good read. That just sort of jumped off the page at me though.
It is indeed a good read, as is most everything Doctorow writes. As for the Neandertal comment, well, the guy's not a paeolanthropologist, after all...
Yes, I agree. I posted this insightful piece because it is so well written, and also as evidence to our skeptic friends around the world that there are still intelligent Americans who are equally concerned and alarmed at the political directions our country is heading.
I agree that E. L. Doctorow's used of the term "Neanderthals" is not addressed to someone with a background in Paleoanthropology. "Neanderthals" is a more colorful, emotional term than "our primitive ancestors" or "cave men." So in context, though not accurate, it didn't bother me.
While reading this compelling piece, the thought occurred: Could specific teachings within President Bush's brand of politico-evangelical Christian beliefs also be one of the contributing factors to his lack of concern toward the deaths of American soldiers in Iraq, and his post-Afghanistan unfocused responses to terrorism?
|
|
|
|
Badger
Skeptic Friend
Canada
257 Posts |
|
|
Chippewa
SFN Regular
USA
1496 Posts |
Posted - 09/28/2004 : 14:34:32 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Badger
A good read to be sure, but I also read this today:
http://www.canoe.ca/NewsStand/Columnists/Toronto/Peter_Worthington/2004/09/28/646211.html
Wow – that is a stretch. Bush compared with Churchill. But Bush did not warn us of the threat of terrorism before 9/11. He was by all evidence, totally unaware of it. (Churchill warned of Nazism long before Hitler invaded Poland in 1939 when World War II started in Europe.)
I like the comparison of George Bush to Franklin D. Roosevelt. If Bush, instead of FDR, were in the White House on 12/07/41 when Imperial Japan attacked Pearl Harbor, the scenario - based on Bush's actions today –would likely be:
Bush in office - does not warn of Japanese military threat – as others had.
1941: Japan attacks Pearl Harbor.
Bush declares war on Japan. (As FDR did.)
Members of the Yamamoto family have business ties to the Bush family and they are whisked out of the country on December 8th and flown to a safe place. The FBI is not given the chance to question the Yamamoto family. (Admiral Yamamoto helped plan the attack on Pearl Harbor.)
Hitler declares war on America. (Churchill is relieved now that US industry can help Britain.) But Bush basically ignores Hitler.
Meanwhile, the US military devises and executes the Dolittle Tokyo Raid in April, 1942. (Remember "30 Seconds Over Tokyo"?) B25s take off from the Hornet aircraft carrier and bomb Tokyo. Though it doesn't stop Japan's expansion into the South Pacific, it has strong propaganda value and destroys some factories.
Bush then sends the US Army, Navy and Air Corps to invade Brazil. After all, it's a dictatorship, and the Nazis have an embassy there. Bush convinces Congress that the Brazilians have Stuka dive bombers. None are found.
It probably gets worse. If John Kerry were in office then, though he's no Roosevelt, (and isn't pretending to be,) one could debate on what he'd do. I think D-Day would have taken place, as big momentous events are decided upon by team effort as well as one leader. However, if Bush were in, I really doubt it, and Britain would be fighting with less US support. Of course the French underground would get nothing.
I don't know what parallels would happen next, but it would surely be worse than the terrible though necessary war which England, Europe and North America fought over 60 years ago.
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
Topic Locked
