Jots w/ dots 6/22

Yeah, it is:  I alluded before, for that to be the perfectly used word you’d like observe the retard there connected to a movement larger and more nefarious than himself.  But he aimed to terrorize, so its terrorism.  Such that it is, the next question is how much do you perceive this event as a leading indicator of a larger trend? I don’t think you do, I don’t think you take the retard as emblematic of a larger body of thought, certainly not ‘right wing’ thought.  I’ll allow a sliver of daylight, as at the moment I’m sensitive to an ambiguous, corrosive hostility out there, and who knows what its power to breed is…. but he’s certainly way less emblematic of ‘right wing’ thought that the Ft. Hood shooter was of radical Muslim thought.  Now, that Ft. Hood was terrorism, right?  Were we able to agree on that?


This is a bit intemperate   Now, it’s true, as far as it goes.  The profit spike is something that happens.  But it’s an externality of the politics, and the politics are not ‘the gun business wants gun rights / a churned up political environment so they can make all this money…’   That’s not an accurate description of the motivations, which are avocational in nature first among just about everyone involved in the trades.  Other thing is, ya compare it to anything else, and the gun industry is not big money business.

Not sure this is fair.  There was, no doubt, at the very least an ambiguous indifference to the holocaust in places.  Or an inability to grasp it.  But the European air war was indifferent to that question, it was an attritional gambit to obliterate the German war machine using every AAC / RAF airplane there was.  IE let’s put 800 B17’s up and saturation bomb Munich eh, and hopefully 500 will come back so we can do it again two days from now.  It was very expensive in terms of crew and plane mortality, not sure it’s a reasonable expectation that a dozen planes could be afforded to bomb a less strategic rail line and be lost doing it.  And to imply that was an option and that Eisenhower / LeMay were malevolently indifferent to it implies a lack of seriousness / character on their part that hasn’t been pointed out in any other ways.

Thing is, it was a noble lie.

I bet it doesn’t  There’s some revisiting of Paul Ehrlich going on here and there last couple weeks.  I’ve been meaning to say something, though maybe what I have to say isn’t all that elaborate.  As a younger person, I was swayed by the doom-ist perspectives.  I unlearned it somehow.


One thought on “Jots w/ dots 6/22

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s