SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: asenna1 who wrote (116772)12/16/2000 6:23:46 AM
From: Neocon  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 769670
 
There is nothing to argue. It is a bunch of nonsense.......



To: asenna1 who wrote (116772)12/16/2000 7:03:02 AM
From: Neocon  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 769670
 
I thought I would explain to you three pillars of conservatism. Note that none has to do with mythology:

I am not a libertarian, but I agree with them that freedom means nothing if it does not mean that one is largely able to dispose of one's assets as one thinks fit, including through testament. Therefore, the bar to substantial interference with economic choices should be high, although I do not think it is absolute. Among the most intimate of transactions is that between doctor and patient. Therefore, I think that anyone who supported Clintoncare, which would have involved substantial penalties for private transactions, is an extremist, since the "health care crisis" was not of sufficient magnitude to lead to such measures.

Similarly, the idea of self- government means little if more local forms of government are not respected. Municipalities and states allow those with the greatest concern with local issues to have the strongest voice in decision making, and to tailor responses to the situation at hand. A state with high unemployment and low pollution, for example, might very well choose to loosen environmental regulation in favor of business, while the opposite might be true in a tight labor market with high pollution. Thus, for self- government to mean much, the federal government must be reluctant to take on issues that can be addressed at lower levels of government. Anyone who thinks that it is the business of the federal government to determine the levels of cops on the beat or computers in the classroom is not very interested in self- government.

Democracy, although it involves substantial protections of minority rights, still means that the majority (or its representatives) gets its way most of the time. It should be with trepidation that the courts overturn legislative decisions and substitute their judgment, and only for compelling reason, or they weaken democracy by trivializing it. That is why I think that overturning Roe v. Wade and giving the matter back to the states is the moderate position on abortion. The penumbras and emanations of Roe were far too fanciful a ground for determining the issue once and for all.



To: asenna1 who wrote (116772)12/16/2000 7:05:59 AM
From: Neocon  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 769670
 
More education:

The essence of compassionate conservatism is to use the federal government as a catalyst for programs that are primarily carried out by states and municipalities and community resource centers, like churches and volunteer organizations. By encouraging experimentation, acting as a clearinghouse of information, and helping with grants to plant seeds, the federal government plays a leading but not exclusive role in the development of programs that work to alleviate various social problems by helping people to help themselves, and raising expectations of those in need to participate in their own recovery, and those in failing communities to participate in their renewal. It lends dignity to those in need, allows for the tailoring of approaches to local situations, encourages charity to supplement the good work, permits trials of different approaches, strengthens community cohesion and mediating institutions, permits a more moral orientation in dealing with self- destructive habits, and lowers bureaucratic overhead.........



To: asenna1 who wrote (116772)12/16/2000 7:07:26 AM
From: Neocon  Respond to of 769670
 
Some problems are better handled by states and municipalities, by churches and charitable organizations, by family and friends. Some may become federal issues. Not everything is amenable to government action, and there are often unintended consequences. Reflexively turning to the federal government to solve one's problems is dopey. It is a big country with a lot of people, and most of them have responsibility to pull their own weight and solve their own problems, individually or in their families or in their communities. That is not "elitist Republican conservatism", that is the American culture in which most of us were raised, of immigrants who wanted a chance to make a better life for themselves and their descendants, of pioneers who pushed West and faced all kinds of hazards to homestead, of unionists who took it upon themselves to organize for better wages and conditions, of mutual aid societies that would help the immigrant with citizenship studies and find him a flat, of churches that became the center of community life in many a small town, of schools built by cities and counties and states to take care of the needs of children, of land grant universities and teacher's colleges....The federal government helped in some of this, to be sure, but it was not the major agent carrying history forward..........



To: asenna1 who wrote (116772)12/16/2000 7:25:00 AM
From: Neocon  Respond to of 769670
 
from the Bhagavad- Gita:
Arjuna If devotion is judged by you to be superior to action, then why, Krishna, do you urge me to do this fearful action? You seem, indeed, to confuse my mind by equivocal words. Therefore, declare only one thing with certainty, by which I may attain the highest good.

Krishna O sinless one! I have already stated that in this world there is a twofold path: 1 that of the Sankhyas by devotion in the shape of true knowledge; 2 and that of the Yogins 3 by devotion in the shape of action. A man does not attain freedom from action merely by not engaging in action; nor does he attain perfection by merely renouncing action. For nobody ever remains even for an instant without performing some action; since the qualities of nature constrain everybody, no-one has free-will in the question of performing or not performing action.

The deluded man who, restraining the organs of action, 4 continues to think in his mind about objects of sense, is called a hypocrite. But he, Arjuna, who restraining his senses with his mind, and being free from attachments, engages in devotion in the shape of action, with the organs of action, is far superior.

You should perform action which is required, for action is better than inaction, and the physical support of your body, too, cannot be accomplished with inaction. This world is fettered by all action other than action for the purpose of the sacrifice. 5

Therefore, Arjuna, do you, casting off attachment, perform action for that purpose. The Creator, having in ancient times created men together with the sacrifice, said:
"Propagate with this (ie, sacrifice). May it be the giver to you of the things you desire. Please the gods with this, and may those gods please you. Pleasing each other, you will attain the highest good. For pleased with the sacrifices, the gods will give you the enjoyments you desire. And he who enjoys himself without giving them what they have given, is, indeed, a thieœ"
The good who eat the leavings of a sacrifice are released from all sins. But the unrighteous ones, who prepare food for themselves only, incur sin. From food are born all creatures; from rain is the production of food; rain is produced by sacrifices; sacrifices are the result of action; know that action has its source in the Vedas; the Vedas come from the indestructible. Therefore the all-comprehending Vedas are always concerned with sacrifices. 6

He who in this world does not contribute to the turning of this wheel is living a sinful life and indulging his senses, and, Arjuna, he lives his life in vain.

But the man who is attached to his self only, who is contented in his self, and is pleased with his self, has nothing to do. He has no interest at all in what is done, and none whatever in what is not done, in this world; nor is any interest of his dependent on any being.

Therefore, always peform action, which must be performed, without attachment. 7 For a man, peforming action without attachment attains the Supreme. By action alone did Janaka and other ancient kings work for perfection .

And in regard also to the keeping of people to their duties. you should perform action. Whatever a great man does, other men do that also. And people follow whatever he receives as authority. There is nothing, Arjuna, for me to do in all the three worlds, 8 nothing to acquire which has not been acquired. Still I do engage in action. For should I at any time not engage without sloth in action, men would follow in my path from all sides, Arjuna. If I did not perform actions, these worlds would be destroyed, I should be the cause of caste interminglings, and I would ruin all the peoples.

As the ignorant act, O descendant of Bharata, with attachment to action, so should a wise man act without attachment, wishing to keep the people to their duties. A wise man should not shake the convictions of the ignorant who are attached to action, but acting with devotion himself should make them apply themselves to all action.

He whose mind is deluded by individuality 9 thinks himself the doer of the actions, which, in every way, are done by the qualities of nature. 10 But he, Arjuna, who knows the truth about the difference from qualities and the difference from actions, forms no attachments, believing that qualities deal with objects of the senses.

But those who are deluded by the qualities of nature form attachments to the actions of the qualities. 11 A man of perfect knowledge should not shake these men of imperfect knowledge in their convictions. Dedicating all actions to me with a mind knowing the relation of the supreme and individual self, engage in battle without desire, without any feeling of possessions, and without any mental anguish.

Even those men who always act on this opinion of mine, full of faith, 12 and without complaining, are released from all actions. But those who complain about my opinion and do not act upon it, know that they lack all judgement, deluded about reality and distant from all knowlede; these men are in essence ruined.

Even a man of knowledge acts according to his own nature. All beings follow nature. What will restraint effect? Every sense has its affections and aversions towards its objects fixed. One should not become subject to them, for they are one's opponents.

One's own duty, though defective, is better than another's duty well performed. Death in performing one's own duty is preferable; the performance of the duty of others is dangerous.

Arjuna But by whom is man impelled, even though unwilling, and, as it were, constrained by force, to commit sin?

Krishna It is desire, 13 it is wrath, born from the quality of passion; it is very ravenous, very sinful. Know that that is the foe in this world. As fire is enveloped by smoke, a mirror by dust, the fetus by the womb, so is knowledge enveloped by desire.

Knowledge, Arjuna, is enveloped by this constant foe of the man of knowledge, in the shape of desire, which is like a fire and insatiable. The senses, the mind, and the understanding are said to be its seat; 14 with these it deludes the embodied self after enveloping knowledge.

Therefore, Arjuna, first restrain your senses, then cast off this sinful thing which destroys knowledge and experience. It has been said that the senses are great, that the mind is greater than the senses, that the understanding is greater than the mind. The self is greater than understanding. Thus knowing that which is higher than the understanding, and restraining yourself by your self, Arjuna, destroy this unmanageable enemy in the shape of desire.
Translated by Kashinath Trimbak Telano, 1882
Edited and annotated by Richard Hooker



To: asenna1 who wrote (116772)12/16/2000 7:27:23 AM
From: Neocon  Respond to of 769670
 
From the Analects of Confucius:
Chi K'ang asked how to cause the people to reverence their ruler, to be faithful to him, and to go on to nerve themselves to virtue. The Master said, "Let him preside over them with gravity;-then they will reverence him. Let him be final and kind to all;-then they will be faithful to him. Let him advance the good and teach the incompetent;-then they will eagerly seek to be virtuous."



To: asenna1 who wrote (116772)12/16/2000 7:29:45 AM
From: Neocon  Respond to of 769670
 
The Analects
By Confucius

Written ca. 500 B.C.E

Table of Contents

Section 1

Part 1

The Master "Is it not pleasant to learn with a constant perseverance and application?

"Is it not delightful to have friends coming from distant quarters?
"Is he not a man of complete virtue, who feels no discomposure though men may take no note of him?"

The philosopher Yu said, "They are few who, being filial and fraternal, are fond of offending against their superiors. There have been none, who, not liking to offend against their superiors, have been fond of stirring up confusion.

"The superior man bends his attention to what is radical. That being established, all practical courses naturally grow up. Filial piety and fraternal submission,-are they not the root of all benevolent actions?"

The Master said, "Fine words and an insinuating appearance are seldom associated with true virtue."

The philosopher Tsang said, "I daily examine myself on three points:-whether, in transacting business for others, I may have been not faithful;-whether, in intercourse with friends, I may have been not sincere;-whether I may have not mastered and practiced the instructions of my teacher."

The Master said, "To rule a country of a thousand chariots, there must be reverent attention to business, and sincerity; economy in expenditure, and love for men; and the employment of the people at the proper seasons."

The Master said, "A youth, when at home, should be filial, and, abroad, respectful to his elders. He should be earnest and truthful. He should overflow in love to all, and cultivate the friendship of the good. When he has time and opportunity, after the performance of these things, he should employ them in polite studies."

Tsze-hsia said, "If a man withdraws his mind from the love of beauty, and applies it as sincerely to the love of the virtuous; if, in serving his parents, he can exert his utmost strength; if, in serving his prince, he can devote his life; if, in his intercourse with his friends, his words are sincere:-although men say that he has not learned, I will certainly say that he has.

The Master said, "If the scholar be not grave, he will not call forth any veneration, and his learning will not be solid.

"Hold faithfulness and sincerity as first principles.
"Have no friends not equal to yourself.
"When you have faults, do not fear to abandon them."
The philosopher Tsang said, "Let there be a careful attention to perform the funeral rites to parents, and let them be followed when long gone with the ceremonies of sacrifice;-then the virtue of the people will resume its proper excellence."

Tsze-ch'in asked Tsze-kung saying, "When our master comes to any country, he does not fail to learn all about its government. Does he ask his information? or is it given to him?"

Tsze-kung said, "Our master is benign, upright, courteous, temperate, and complaisant and thus he gets his information. The master's mode of asking information,-is it not different from that of other men?"

The Master said, "While a man's father is alive, look at the bent of his will; when his father is dead, look at his conduct. If for three years he does not alter from the way of his father, he may be called filial."

The philosopher Yu said, "In practicing the rules of propriety, a natural ease is to be prized. In the ways prescribed by the ancient kings, this is the excellent quality, and in things small and great we follow them.

"Yet it is not to be observed in all cases. If one, knowing how such ease should be prized, manifests it, without regulating it by the rules of propriety, this likewise is not to be done."

The philosopher Yu said, "When agreements are made according to what is right, what is spoken can be made good. When respect is shown according to what is proper, one keeps far from shame and disgrace. When the parties upon whom a man leans are proper persons to be intimate with, he can make them his guides and masters."

The Master said, "He who aims to be a man of complete virtue in his food does not seek to gratify his appetite, nor in his dwelling place does he seek the appliances of ease; he is earnest in what he is doing, and careful in his speech; he frequents the company of men of principle that he may be rectified:-such a person may be said indeed to love to learn."

Tsze-kung said, "What do you pronounce concerning the poor man who yet does not flatter, and the rich man who is not proud?" The Master replied, "They will do; but they are not equal to him, who, though poor, is yet cheerful, and to him, who, though rich, loves the rules of propriety."

Tsze-kung replied, "It is said in the Book of Poetry, 'As you cut and then file, as you carve and then polish.'-The meaning is the same, I apprehend, as that which you have just expressed."

The Master said, "With one like Ts'ze, I can begin to talk about the odes. I told him one point, and he knew its proper sequence."

The Master said, "I will not be afflicted at men's not knowing me; I will be afflicted that I do not know men."



To: asenna1 who wrote (116772)12/16/2000 7:50:30 AM
From: Neocon  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 769670
 
Some more discussion of morality:

As I have described earlier, the various philosophical schools of ancient Greece sought to determine the end of man, and often disagreed. However, there were some things in common. For example, the Stoics, when they recommended living in "accord with Nature", meant to align oneself with the Logos, which was immanent in Nature, and cultivate indifference to fortune and adherence to duty. Thus, one rises above the passions, and aquits oneself as a well as a member of the human community---- in fact, the Stoics coined the word "cosmopolite", citizen of the world. In that, they resembled Hinayana Buddhism, karma yoga, and Taoism, although Taoism more resembles a sort of extreme version of Stoic doctrine, Cynicism, which was more hostile to luxury and embellishment, and deliberately cultivated a certain plainness and even rudeness.

The Epicureans reasoned that the goal of life is the avoidance of pain, and therefore the pursuit of moderate pleasure, to avoid the pangs of desire. However, they considered the best life one of scholarship, the pursuit of intellectual pleasures and only moderate sensual indulgence, an existence that was orderly and fitting for a refined sensibility, and thus, one that was distinctly human.

Plato and Aristotle considered the intellect to be the highest faculty of man, and that the passions should be subordinated to it, and ordered by it. They considered philosophy the highest pursuit, and a well- ordered polity one that supported it, and was ruled by it.

In Hinduism, the goal is to rise above the snare of the sensual universe. Through karmic advancement, which means the performance of duty, and sometimes through shortcuts like asceticism or bhakti (renunciatory devotion), one is reborn into ever higher castes, further removed from menial labor or a preoccupation with the mundane, and finally liberated to join one's atman with Brahm, and transcend the sensual world once and for all.

In Mahayana Buddhism, there is a similar concern with overcoming sansara, the world of sensual illusion, and realizing one's "Buddha- nature", eventually to achieve Nirvana. Popular piety has added the notion of the Boddhisattvas, beings who forgo ultimate enlightenment in order to help mere mortals, and therefore provides for the possibility of favorable rebirth through devotion and grace.

In Judaism, man is given dominion over the world, and considered to be a "little lower than the angels", and in the "image of God". The sabbath day is set aside, not merely for honoring God, but as a day of rest for oneself and one's servants. One is enjoined to care for the weakest members of the community, which becomes a perennial test of fidelity to the word of God. One is enjoined to treat the stranger with hospitality. Many rules of cleanliness and purity are advanced. Human sacrifice is adamantly considered an abomination, and animal sacrifice is substituted. Man is capable of entering into covenants with the Supreme Being.

Nietzsche considered "slave morality" to be inferior precisely because it was more utilitarian, and represented the petty concerns of man, and enshrined his weakness. "Master morality" emanated from the health, vigor, and self-esteem of the patrician, and enshrined the principle of noblesse oblige, a sense of chivalry and magnanimity. It valued admiration, great feats, stunning achievement, elegant refinement, and ambitious creation. Nobility was the aspiring part of man.

In other places, like the Eddas, some of the qualities of "master morality" may be seen: a determination to stand bravely, generosity as an expression of overflowing strength, abashedness at certain undignified weaknesses, like over- drunkenness, the urge to enshrine great deeds in story or song.

This is already a pretty lengthy summary, so I will not comment on everything, but these are among the observations that I relied on in attempting to formulate the nature of morality, as it is commonly expressed........



To: asenna1 who wrote (116772)12/16/2000 7:55:04 AM
From: Neocon  Respond to of 769670
 
In general, liberals are biased towards "personal fulfillment", and conservatives are biased towards "duty"; liberals are biased towards "discovering oneself", and conservatives are biased towards "developing character". Liberals tend to admire those who are spontaneous and somewhat showy, for being free and self- expressive; conservatives tend to admire those who are disciplined and unassuming in demeanor. In other words, there is an outlook or orientation that tends to inform judgment pretty strongly, on both sides.



To: asenna1 who wrote (116772)12/16/2000 8:44:47 AM
From: Neocon  Respond to of 769670
 
One of the products of modernity is disenchantment, and it is not restricted to the irreligious. Even the religious are forced by science and technology into a world that has been largely de- personalized and rendered mechanical. We learn to regard most things as problems to be solved, and are not shy about invasive methods of investigation. We expect most things to yield to our inquiries, and we expect to be capable of manipulating ever larger portions of the material world with our technical skill. Meanwhile, the sacred places and familiar spirits of pre- modern cultures are destroyed or banished. One reason for conspiracy theories is the resistance to understanding human fortune as the result of impersonal forces. Instead, the Zionist Occupation Government, or the Tri-Lateralists are manipulating things against decent people. Besides, if small cabals can have an effect, perhaps the scale of human action permits me and my friends, the guys with the leaflets or the shotguns, to decisively change history. Also, if you are a fundamentalist of a certain stripe, say a member of Hezbollah, it is still necessary to explain why the Faithful have been subject to the vagaries of history, and the glory that was once Islam has faded, overshadowed by the ascendency of Christendom. Surely the will of Allah has been thwarted, as a test of the Faithful...



To: asenna1 who wrote (116772)12/16/2000 8:56:14 AM
From: Neocon  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 769670
 
Some notes on my framework:

I presume that our century has been characterized by two titanic struggles, the first with fascism, and more especially Nazism, with its virulent racial theories; and the second with Communism, especially as embodied in the Soviet Union, with its virulent theories of class conflict. If these are the central conflicts, then those instrumental in ensuring victory against these foes are among the greats or near greats of this century.

Second, the rise of technology, maturing of industrialization, and urbanization of the West has altered the prospects for human beings profoundly, promising a time when the greater mass of humanity will be free of "bucolic idiocy" and endless drudgery, and will have the means and leisure to make significant life choices. Therefore, those who were instrumental in the basic science, inventions, and industrial and economic organization permitting us to see this light at the end of the tunnel for the "common man" must be counted very significant.

Third, the rise of popular culture, embodying democratic notions, liberating people to create congenial environments for themselves, providing exposure to a broad cultural milieu through entertainment, and spreading "Americanism", that is, the culture of modernity, throughout the globe, has mainly been a blessing, and a means of preparing people for the attenuation of traditional society that modern development brings. Thus, innovators, creators, and performers in popular culture who especially helped to define it are exceptionally important.

Fourth, the fate of elite culture, which is important in the development of the sensibilities of those who are likeliest to attain positions of influence in our society, is no small matter, as it relates to the preservations of standards, and therefore those with who are among the important writers and artists of the century merit scrutiny, and, in some cases, inclusion.



To: asenna1 who wrote (116772)12/16/2000 9:26:34 AM
From: Neocon  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 769670
 
I wanted to say something about the Decline of the West, before I forget. Some conservatives denigrate American society too much, and I have said so in
several public forums. But for those of us who believe that Western Civilization is the source of most of what is valid in the modern world, and that promoting Western Civilization
amounts to helping other societies learn the necessary underpinnings of modernization, the continued denigration of the West which has become pervasive in academic and left- wing circles is threatening to the progress of the world, and therefore to the peace and prosperity of the United States, which has not only idealistic reasons to hope that other countries adopt democratic capitalism, but which, as a trading nation, is dependent upon stability and a broad prosperity.
On the home front, it is simply true that the fabric of family life has been frayed in the liberationist era, to the detriment of children, and that ill- considered social policies have created an underclass totally unprepared for the world of work and responsibility, and frequently criminal. I live in the Washington metropolitan area, as you might have guessed, and recently there were five separate instances of young men shooting other young men
over Eddie Bauer coats, two of them fatal. How many socio- paths can a society afford to create?