Live from the Middle East

[Grislygus]

Originally Posted by Preechr

I once made you an offer that I'd mail you brand-spanking-new copies of several books I'd love to see you read. That offer is still open. PM me an address, and you will have them in a week.

I have nothing to add to the conversation, but I'd like to butt in and ask what those books were.

[Preechr]

I'm gonna start him on Fountainhead, then Atlas Shrugged, just to get him going. Very easy reads, and very instructional. Then, The Lexus and the Olive Tree for some economic reality, followed by The Pentagon's New Map to build on that and bring him into the post-9/11 world. Nothing particularly right-wing, left-wing or controversial, just realistic, objective and practical.

Depending on how he progresses, I might add to that list. If he quits on the first few pages, he'll at least have the books for the day he chooses to pick them back up. He has displayed a wide range in tastes, but no taste for industrious study. Who knows where a little reading might take him?

If he shows an interest in science, I'd try some Hawking or maybe Blink if he hasn't already read that far. Anthro- or Sociology: Guns, Germs and Steel is a long one but doable and fun. For religion, I like The Life of Pi even though it's fiction and not very deep. (I'm not a very religious person anymore...) If he decides he likes politics, he'd need a firm grounding in stuff like Bastiat's The Law and some gritty History that, were I to list it, I'd surely be accused of trying to brain-wash the guy... so I won't.

Really though, I figure once he gets half way through Fountainhead, he won't let me buy him anything anymore.

[Grislygus]

Oh, I was hoping you had some historical reccomendations. I just finished Founding Brothers, so I don't have anything to read at the moment.

[kahljorn]

Ayn Rand's a cool author but I don't have any of her books just exerpts so you should have my address in your inbox in a second. i don't remember you making that offer, though, I just remember you bringing up Atlas Shrugged because Iwastalking about selfishness or something. I thought fountainhead was also fiction?

"You know I really don't know why people think humans are anything more than animals."

that was a rhetorical statement by the way Ido know why I just think it's retarded. Usually when I say "I don't know why" it means that I think somebody's making a bad decision.

"it's just that what's in there generally has no relation whatsoever to reality. "

Thisstrikes me as really odd because the only thing I care about is reality (not even just humanreality just reality). When I talk about humans being animals that's reality, when i say it's our big brain giving us the capacity to be smart it's reality. I mean, we've had so many discussions about this and even what I think is necessary for our Governments and education process if we want to raise "Humans" and not animals.
I think most people live in an illusory world where they ignore the cold hard facts in exchange for happy, self-indentifying facts that make them feel better about living.

How is what I say "Unrealistic"? I state problems, the nature of the problem, and rarily state an unrealistic solution. I try to state reality

ps actually i rarily read wikipedia and never read linked articles unless I'm interested or something. Usually all of my "Johnny on the spot" with knowledge comes from looking at a word and estimating it's meaning then just ranting.

[Preechr]

Originally Posted by Grislygus

Oh, I was hoping you had some historical reccomendations. I just finished Founding Brothers, so I don't have anything to read at the moment.

Ooh! Ooh!

http://www.amazon.com/Empire-Wealth-...e=UTF8&s=books

!!!!!!

Excellent History/Economics book.

[kahljorn]

ps i am intellectually lazy kind of. it's mostly because it's more fun and more satisfying to figure things out on my own than it is to read the same thing in ten different books. you know that rush you get when you're "estimating" and guessing and inventing. I like drugs.

[Preechr]

haha

[kahljorn]

two books on globalization huh :O
what do you think of peter singers One World: the ethics of globalization?

Also what did you think of the parts in the communist manifesto in which it claims that deprivitization will occur as a result of Globalization? I felt the parts of the communist manifesto I read were less about a system of government that will save us from our wicked ways but more about how through Globalization deprivitization will occur as a result of "inner-national" friction and conflict. basically that globalization would make us less likely to take shit from others. As if it spells out a natural process of progression that will occur because of globalization regardless of what happens, rather than wanting a change in government. Kind of like a prediction almost.

[Preechr]

Well, Communism was pretty much totally against Capitalism, so the Manifesto isn't what you'd call an objective resource. It's also a bit dated... A lot has happened since 1848, y'know.

I've never read Peter Singer... There's a lot of mythology surrounding Capitalism and prodution ethos, and a lot of people holding signs at protests they know nothing about. I'm not prejudging anybody. I just recommended a book that covers the bases pretty well in my opinion. You will judge it for yourself, I'm sure.

The Pentagon's New Map isn't as much about Globalization as it is about an objective, forward-thinking world based in Globalization. It's where we are, in fact, and there's a pretty cool place to be in fornt of us if we choose to go there.

[kahljorn]

"Well, Communism was pretty much totally against Capitalism, so the Manifesto isn't what you'd call an objective resource. It's also a bit dated... A lot has happened since 1848, y'know. "

Well marxist conflict theory is still alive and well today :O I just thought it was interesting that he thought globalization would cause his type of government because people would start to stand up for themselves as society progresses, also through all the global pressure placed on businesses/governments to comply to moral/ethical standards. Sounds like something you'd go for.

[Sethomas]

I've never read Ayn Rand, but judging by the Objectivist Club at my old school I'd have to say that I never have any plans to do so. I mean, if I wanted people to think I'm any more of a dick, I'd just start out by ceasing to use my turn signals as religiously as I do and work up to smoking indoors in places that prohibit it.

[kahljorn]

lol everyone I know who reads ayn rand is a stupid prick too, and they were stupid pricks before they read it. i think her work attracts stupid pricks

the only thing I read that I thoroughly enjoyed was the ethics of selfishnesswhich was basically a critique on altruistic morality. Ithink her biggest example/claim is using the old IF A MAN WAS DROWNING IN A RIVER WOULD YOU JUMP INTO TO SAVE HIM. Altruists would say yes! But ayn rand takes it a step further and says, WAIT WHAT IF YOU CANT SWIM THEN YOUD DIE. Genius.

i dont know about objectivism but it doesn't seem so bad

[Preechr]

Originally Posted by Sethomas

I've never read Ayn Rand, but judging by the Objectivist Club at my old school I'd have to say that I never have any plans to do so. I mean, if I wanted people to think I'm any more of a dick, I'd just start out by ceasing to use my turn signals as religiously as I do and work up to smoking indoors in places that prohibit it.

That's the big warning label that should go on her books. She basically paints a picture of a world full of idealized, iconic producers and dangerous, looting leeches that aren't even really alive. A young person reading that sort of stuff will generally decide she's, of course, one of the good guys. Unfortunately, young people will also tend to forget her philosophy is packaged in a romantic novel, not a non-fiction tome. She is portraying a world that doesn't really exist, not one that can or will be, in order to highlight the ethical and moral problems that plague the actual world.

I've read some very good critiques of her work by some that have actually read her work at an early age, and they complained that after having mistaken her fictional world for our real one, they did indeed become assholes for many years. Well, the critics didn't actually accept the mistake they made, instead they chose to blame her for lying to them about the nature of the world.

She doesn't advocate that moral people should attack or even notice "looters." She highlights the ultimate ends of two moral paths through life: the moral path that worships life as a man, and the immoral path that claims death is man's highest ideal. It's a very black and white world, and some of her younger readers have a hard time understanding gray. Since gray is what most of what the real world is, there's no way she could cover all that in any number of books... so, she mostly avoids it when portraying the godlike producers, with a couple notable exceptions. That's left for the reader to fill in.

Each looter character is a portrayal of one moral flaw writ large. Sane real people aren't like that.

[mburbank]

I can't take anyone seriously who thinks architects are macho, orgasms are empirical and doesn't know how to spell 'Anne'.

And watchout! Alphaboy will soon swoop in and tell your conversation has gone into forbidden areas, and I for one agree. I can only hope this irrelevance storm will drive him to the thread I created for him where I agreed to abide by any rule or deffinition he chose to make. THERE we could have growthful discussion. Not here, that's for damn sure.

[sspadowsky]

OAO is back. I can't believe he hasn't infected this thread yet.

[Preechr]

WELL YOU DON'T HAVE TO CALL HIS ATTENTION TO IT!!!

[sspadowsky]

Pffft. Like anyone needs to.

[derrida]

Originally Posted by Preechr

Well, Communism was pretty much totally against Capitalism, so the Manifesto isn't what you'd call an objective resource. It's also a bit dated... A lot has happened since 1848, y'know.

You're right on the first point. Das Kapital, which lacks the creepy input of Engels, is a more academic tome, and addresses the same issue.

Globalization does bring the possibility of international unions, which I could see as potentially destabilizing some private institutions. As for the increase in inter-national friction as a cause of change (as may be represented by the WOT), it first must mutate into an ideology not governed by a wahabiist reaction to modernity spurred by elites but rather into a unique and culturally grounded arab socialist project. Possible, though seemingly unlikely.

[Preechr]

Yeah, I thought Syriana was a pretty good movie, too, but it WAS just a movie...

[kahljorn]

it's not as if I was quoting the unobjective, capitalist hating portion of the manifesto.

[Courage the Cowardly Dog]

Well Iranian president doesn't seem to keen on the upcoming confrence.

he said predicting the downfall of the US and asking for more fighters to drive us out. (despite the fact if they sent peacekeeping troops instead of rebels we COULD leave QUICKER!)
__________________________________________________

Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad predicted the collapse of Israel, the U.S. and Britain, attacking what he called their ``oppressive behavior.''

``The Zionist regime is on a steep downhill towards collapse and disgrace,'' Ahmandinejad told supporters at a rally of Basiji militia forces near Tehran today. In a reference to the U.S. and U.K., he said ``the collapse and crumbling of your devilish rule has started.'' The speech was carried live on state television.

Iran doesn't recognize Israel, and Ahmadinejad drew international condemnation after saying in October 2005 that Israel should be ``wiped off the map.'' The U.S. and Iran have had no diplomatic ties since 1980 following the seizure of diplomats at the U.S. Embassy in Tehran in 1979.

The U.K., which has an embassy in Tehran, is among the three European countries pushing for sanctions against Iran over its nuclear program.

The Iranian president also called on neighboring countries to drive out ``foreign occupiers,'' in a reference to U.S.-led forces in Iraq and Afghanistan.

``The people of the region are well able to establish regional security,'' the president said in the speech near the shrine of the Islamic Republic founder Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini. ``The presence of foreigners is the source of discord and conflict.''

Iraqi President Jalal Talabani, whose visit to Tehran yesterday was postponed because of the curfew imposed on Baghdad since Nov. 23, will fly to the Iranian capital tomorrow, state television reported separately today.

The Iraqi president's trip to Iran is aimed at ``expanding bilateral ties in business, trade and transport affairs,'' the report said. Iraq security will not be the main issue discussed in this meeting, the Iranian Foreign Ministry's press office said on Nov. 21.

source: Bloomberg.com