Steve since you decided on a BMW now you need Aerostich.
Steve since you decided on a BMW now you need Aerostich.
Sam Liles
Selil Blog
Don't forget to duck Secret Squirrel
The scholarship of teaching and learning results in equal hatred from latte leftists and cappuccino conservatives.
All opinions are mine and may or may not reflect those of my employer depending on the chance it might affect funding, politics, or the setting of the sun. As such these are my opinions you can get your own.
I subscribe to the following theory:
1. The insane are only geopolitically dangerous if the sane start following them.
2. The sane will only start following the insane if they feel hopeless and have no sane options.
So when you have a charismatic nut job - i.e. Hitler and UBL - plus a bunch of hopeless people, you have the potential for the formation of a very bizarre and destructive movement.
Since lunacy is difficult to eradicate or predict, it makes sense not to have large groups of hopeless people: i.e. the Marshall plan.
But that doesn't mean these movement are inevitable, or our government is screwed up or whatever. It just means that when these conditions exist, this can happen.
Probably the best way to predict is to listen to the nut job. Both Hitler and UBL said what they were going to do before they did it.
I've already gotten one Hein Gericke jacket and ordered another, and ordered Alpinestar boots.
re: Metz-marct discussion (p. 4)
In attempting to see things from the viewpoint of our extreme Salafist brethren, I like to start with Maududi. Maududi wrote with clarity (as also his intros to each sura in the Koran) and brevity. His much larger body of work is lost to me, since I am not an Arabist.
Sayyeed Abdul A'la Maududi, Jihad in Islam (Lahore, 1939) (pamphlet based on an address given by Maududi on April 13, 1939), where he answered the question :
"What does Jihad Actually Mean?
"If Islam is a “Religion”, and Muslims are a “Nation”, according to the commonly accepted understandings of these terms, then Jihad - despite the fact that it has been dignified with the title “The Best of all Prayers” in Islam - becomes a meaningless and useless term. But Islam is not the name of a mere “Religion”, nor is Muslim the title of a “Nation”. In reality Islam is a revolutionary ideology and programme which seeks to alter the social order of the whole world and rebuild it in conformity with its own tenets and ideals." [p5 in this .pdf]
http://www.ukim.org/dawah/jihad.pdf
I suggest that Maududi saw the "center of gravity" as the person. Convert the person and all good things would flow from enough conversions (which, btw, cannot be forced). So, Maududi's program requires true believers, cutting across national and even tribal boundaries.
Maududi also makes it clear that there is no distinction between "offensive" and "defensive" jihad; that political and military methods are interlinked to achieve the end result; and that his brand of Islam is not adverse to technology, trade and commerce, applied in conformity with Islamic standards.
So, we have a utopian end result (cf., Marxist-Leninism); but based on a religious construct encompassing not only politics and governance, but all aspects of a person's life. Pretty heady stuff for many people.
Focusing on "tribes" does come closer to Maududi's "center of gravity" - the person. Focusing on "nations" seems irrelevant. Just some thoughts on a person who seems to have been a "practical anthropologist".
Sorry, can't help on motorcyles. Physically unable to ride a bicycle, or to safely mount a motorcycle (or a horse). But have fun.
Rank Amateur wrote:
Hitler and UBL were/are fanatics, not primarily mentally ill figures though neurotic conditions and personality disorders may have been aggravating factors in their decision making styles.So when you have a charismatic nut job - i.e. Hitler and UBL - plus a bunch of hopeless people, you have the potential for the formation of a very bizarre and destructive movement.
Hi RA,
Hmmm, I've got a few reservations about some of the assumptions here. First, I would hold that "sanity" is culturally defined. For example, "hearing voices" has been defined as "sane", "normal" and "holy" in many cultures, although in ours it is one of the few guarantees of getting of on a "not guilty due to mental defect" defence.
Second, with a few minor (and one major) exception, I don't think that we, as a species, have developed a "mental" technology that can actually define what is and is not sane, so we default to cultural definitions.
Third, what makes you think that the nut jobs don't already control our societies ?
Always assuming that "lunacy" is based on material comfort - an assumption I am not altogether comfortable with. Besides that, some of my best friends are lunatics . Seriously, though, that is a good base to start from but, without a good "mental" technology, it is probably doomed to failure in the long run.
Sic Bisquitus Disintegrat...
Marc W.D. Tyrrell, Ph.D.
Institute of Interdisciplinary Studies,
Senior Research Fellow,
The Canadian Centre for Intelligence and Security Studies, NPSIA
Carleton University
http://marctyrrell.com/
As always, word choice is crucial when the debate is so intense. Substitute "extremely radical" for "insane" and I believe that my point holds. There were no cultural, political or economic forces that made it likely that the Germans would try to exterminate all Jews, but it happened because of one man - who wouldn't have received any support if anyone less extreme had been able to address what a large number of Germans considered a legitimate grievance - was able to gain a following.
The longer that perceived grievances go undressed the more likely the aggrieved are too turn to extreme "solutions." And the fact that the majority of people think "there's no way some one would round up and exterminate an entire race of people" or "some radical hiding in an Afghan cave can't attack America" doesn't change that.
. . . me being me, (as I think I mentioned to Selil the other week), I had to send Dr. McKenna a way-too-long email explaining patiently why he is (1) wrong, (2) underestimating the military and AWC, and (3) still wrong. I got a curt reply saying essentially nothing either way, and assumed that was the end of it.
In retrospect, perhaps I should have taken the patented SteveMetz route and inserted more smart-assery in the email, because yesterday Dr. McKenna "friended" me across the wide array of social networking sites (most of which I'm not even on - got "invited to join") - Facebook, MySpace, something called "plaxo pulse . . ."
Anyway, somebody please tell me I'm not the only one receiving the stalker treatment from Herr Doktor. . .
Regards,
Matt
"Give a good leader very little and he will succeed. Give a mediocrity a great deal and he will fail." - General George C. Marshall
"Anyway, somebody please tell me I'm not the only one receiving the stalker treatment from Herr Doktor. . ."
Some call it stalking...others, a "bromance"
Steve,
I find people like Dr. McKenna to be so ridiculous and arrogant that they make themsleves compeletly ineffective and marginalize themselves.
I look at his proposed agenda for "Anthropology 101" and instead of the teaching of skill sets and professor pushing his own political agenda. For hacks like him, ethics are fluid.
I think what is the most angering is the unmitigated gaul of assuming ignorance...
Last edited by SWCAdmin; 07-19-2008 at 01:21 PM. Reason: removed some of the more colorful observations
Sic Bisquitus Disintegrat...
Marc W.D. Tyrrell, Ph.D.
Institute of Interdisciplinary Studies,
Senior Research Fellow,
The Canadian Centre for Intelligence and Security Studies, NPSIA
Carleton University
http://marctyrrell.com/
An article in the IISS journal 'Survival': Anthropology in Conflict: An Exchange with Rye Barcott, James Peacock, Roberto J. González, Nadje Al-Ali and Laura A. McNamara.
Interesting as Barcott is a US Marine officer, with combat experience in Iraq and as a civilian in a Kenyan slum. The other three are all academics and have varying views.
Can be access (not free) via: http://www.iiss.org/publications/sur...-2008-issue-3/
'Survival' can often be found in good libraries.
davidbfpo
Thanks for the link, David! I'm about halfway through right now and, so far, my favorite line is from James Peacock (page 145)
And now, onto González's piece...As an anthropologist, I often wish we would emulate Marines in getting the job done. We actually do get really tough jobs done in fieldwork – that is, in research, discovery – but we become academic when facing the task of applying knowledge to situations of change. We often stop with perspectives, leaving action to the Marines.
Sic Bisquitus Disintegrat...
Marc W.D. Tyrrell, Ph.D.
Institute of Interdisciplinary Studies,
Senior Research Fellow,
The Canadian Centre for Intelligence and Security Studies, NPSIA
Carleton University
http://marctyrrell.com/
You know, Barcott's concluding paragraph is just beautiful in the "Here I stand" genre:
I would hope that social scientists and other scholars are courageous enough to communicate not just with the ‘general public’, as González recommends, but also with members of his ‘political and military elites’. As to his objection to my calling for us to ‘make the world a better, safer and more equitable place’ on the grounds that this ‘echoes the sentiments of nineteenth-century imperialists’, let me suggest that similar sentiments were echoed by Abraham Lincoln, Albert Einstein, Woodrow Wilson, Mahatma Gandhi, Mother Theresa, Martin Luther King Jr, Pope John Paul II and Nelson Mandela. If they were ‘imperialists’ in this regard, then I am honoured to echo them.
Sic Bisquitus Disintegrat...
Marc W.D. Tyrrell, Ph.D.
Institute of Interdisciplinary Studies,
Senior Research Fellow,
The Canadian Centre for Intelligence and Security Studies, NPSIA
Carleton University
http://marctyrrell.com/
Bookmarks