Extra
1 decade ago in Quotes
The reason we don't live in a dungeon is because people have joined together to change things.
1 decade ago in Zitate
Die intellektuelle Tradition ist eine des Buckelns vor Macht, und wenn ich sie nicht betrügen würde, würde ich mich meiner selbst schämen.
1 decade ago in Zitate
Keiner steht einfach auf und sagt "Ich werde mir das hier nehmen, weil ich es will." Er wird sagen, "Ich werde es nehmen, weil es ja eigentlich mir gehört, und es besser für alle wäre, wenn ich es hätte." Das trifft auf Kinder zu, die sich um Spielzeug streiten, und auch auf Regierungen, die in Kriege ziehen. Niemand ist jemals in einen Angriffskrieg involviert; es ist immer ein Verteidigungskrieg - auf beiden Seiten.
1 decade ago in Zitate
Jeder mächtige Staat verlässt sich auf Spezialisten, deren Aufgabe es ist, zu zeigen, dass das, was die Starken tun, nobel und gerecht ist, und dass es die Schuld der Schwachen ist, wenn diese leiden. Im Westen nennt man diese Spezialisten "Intellektuelle", und sie, mit kaum nennenswerten Ausnahmen, erfüllen ihre Aufgabe mit großer Fertigkeit und Selbstgerechtigkeit, egal wie lachhaft ihre Behauptungen sind, in dieser Praxis, die sich bis zu den Ursprüngen aufgezeichneter Geschichte zurückverfolgen lässt.
1 decade ago in Zitate
Der effektivste Weg, Demokratie zu beschränken, ist das Treffen von Entscheidungen von der öffentlichen Sphäre hin zu Institutionen zu verlagern, die nicht zur Rechenschaft gezogen werden können: Könige und Prinzen, Priesterkasten, Militärjuntas, Parteidiktaturen, oder moderne Unternehmen.
1 decade ago in Quotes
Nowadays, all you do is hear the media's description of what the candidate is saying, and one of the strange things about it is that politics is now presented in terms of politicians and not politics. I don't think the media is interested in politics, they're interested in politicians, which is a wholly different subject... who's doing this, about their private life, about their background, about what they must be thinking, might be thinking when they said something, why did they say it; but what they say is very, very hard to hear. And I think this is, in a sense, indeed quite deliberately, destroying the genuine democratic base on which people are elected.
1 decade ago in Quotes
The only justification for repressive institutions is material and cultural deficit. But such institutions, at certain stages of history, perpetuate and produce such a deficit, and even threaten human survival.
1 decade ago in Quotes
Once it sinks in how fucked we are, we need to examine why. Why is because we have some faulty thinking. Why do we have faulty thinking? Garbage in, garbage out. Figure out what the garbage is and who's shoveling it in your trough. First clue, follow the money.
1 decade ago in Quotes
The following extract shows how a messaging client's text entry could be arbitrarily restricted to a fixed number of characters, thus forcing any conversation through this medium to be terse and discouraging intelligent discourse.<label>What are you doing? <input name=status maxlength=140></label>
1 decade ago in Quotes
The price of apathy towards public affairs is to be ruled by evil men.
1 decade ago in Quotes
Education is the process of casting false pearls before real swine.
1 decade ago in Quotes
not to become tired but to hold out your hand to the miracle gently, as though to a bird
1 decade ago in Quotes
[Computers] are useless. They only give us answers.
1 decade ago in Quotes
Internet users won't know what they've got till it's gone.
1 decade ago in Quotes
It's so hard to forget pain, but it's even harder to remember sweetness. We have no scar to show for happiness. We learn so little from peace.
1 decade ago in Quotes
States are not moral agents, people are, and can impose moral standards on powerful institutions.
1 decade ago in Quotes
See, people with power understand exactly one thing: violence.
1 decade ago in Quotes
Our suffering at the hands of these barbarians is the sole moral issue that remains after a quarter-century of violence, in which we vigorously backed the French effort to reconquer their former colonies; instantly demolished the 1954 diplomatic settlement; installed a regime of corrupt and murderous thugs and torturers in the southern sector where we had imposed our rule; attacked that sector directly when the terror and repression of our clients elicited a reaction that they could not withstand; expanded our aggression to all of Indochina with saturation bombing of densely-populated areas, chemical warfare attacks to destroy crops and vegetation, bombing of dikes, and huge mass murder operations and terror programs when refugee-generation, population removal, and bulldozing of villages failed; ultimately leaving three countries destroyed, perhaps beyond the hope of recovery, the devastated land strewn with millions of corpses and unexploded ordnance, with countless destitute and maimed, deformed fetuses in the hospitals of the South that do not touch the heartstrings of "pro-life" enthusiasts, and other horrors too awful to recount in a region "threatened with extinction...as a cultural and historic entity...as the countryside literally dies under the blows of the largest military machine ever unleashed on an area of this size," in the words of the hawkish historian Bernard Fall, one of the leading experts on Vietnam, in 1967 - that is, before the major US atrocities were set in motion.
1 decade ago in Quotes
Naturally, one does not want to confront enemies that can fight back, but even much weaker enemies must be destroyed quickly, given the weakness of the domestic base and the lessons that are to be taught.
These lessons are directed to several audiences. For the Third World, the message is simple: Don't raise your heads. A "much weaker" opponent will not merely be defeated, but pulverized. The central lesson of World Order is: "What we say goes"; we are the masters, you shine our shoes, and don't ever forget it. Others too are to understand that the world is to be ruled by force, the arena in which the US reigns supreme, though with its domestic decline, others will have to pay the bills.
There is also a lesson for the domestic audience. They must be terrorized by images of a menacing force about to overwhelm us -- though in fact "much weaker" and defenseless. The monster can then be miraculously slain, "decisively and rapidly," while the frightened population celebrates its deliverance from imminent disaster, praising the heroism of the Great Leader who has come to the rescue just in the nick of time.
These techniques, which have familiar precedents, were employed through the 1980s, for sound reasons. The population was opposed to the major Reagan policies, largely an extension of Carter plans. It was therefore necessary to divert attention to ensure that democratic processes would remain as "hypothetical" as the peace process. Propaganda campaigns created awesome chimeras: international terrorists, Sandinistas marching on Texas, narcotraffickers, crazed Arabs.Z Magazine (May 1991)
1 decade ago in Quotes
In September [2002] the government announced the national security strategy. That is not completely without precedent, but it is quite new as a formulation of state policy. What is stated is that we are tearing the entire system of the international law to shreds, the end of UN charter, and that we are going to carry out an aggressive war - which we will call "preventive" - and at any time we choose, and that we will rule the world by force. In addition, we will assure that there is never any challenge to our domination because we are so overwhelmingly powerful in military force that we will simply crush any potential challenge. That caused shudders around the world, including the foreign policy elite at home which was appalled by this. It is not that things like that haven't been heard in the past. Of course they had, but it had never been formulated as an official national policy. I suspect you will have to go back to Hitler to find an analogy to that.
Now, when you propose new norms in the international behavior and new policies you have to illustrate it, you have to get people to understand that you mean it. Also you have to have what a Harvard historian called an "exemplary war", a war of example, which shows that we really mean what we say. And we have to choose the right target. The target has to have several properties. First it has to be completely defenseless. No one would attack anybody who might be able to defend themselves, that would be not prudent. Iraq meets that perfectly... And secondly, it has to be important. So there will be no point invading Burundi, for example. It has to be a country worthwhile controlling, owning, and Iraq has that property too.