Power corrupts us . Absolute power .
Isn’t this concept more appropriate in a totalitarian context,of communist nature to be precise ?
For America,and therefore the rest of the world,shouldn’t we be speaking of absolute (free) capitalism ?
And,all things considered,isn’t Kurt Vonnegut quite happy to be living in that system?
For with the excesses capitalism may produce also comes the diversity and freedom that characterizes American society .
The Arabs did -not- invent the numbers we use.The Indo Europeans did.As well as the zero. It appeared in 458 AD in an indian cosmology treaty.Defined in 628 by Brahmagupta as the result of a whole number substracted from itself.
It was not before the eight century that the zero,as well as the rest of the Indo Europeans numerals,was introduced at the court of Bagdad….by an indian astronomer.
The Arabs ,in this story,are therefore transmitters,not discoverers.
Kurt Vonnegut,in this story as well as in others….. a bullshitter.
The parallel between Native Americans and today’s baghdadis : Bullshit.
The disconnection of the free press? It does smell a bit country-ish to me .
The Jerry Garcia cameo: OK,it is certainly true,but—- who the hell cares !! And what relevance besides trying to play the post-hippy string in American liberals ?
Cold turkey on fossil fuels ?
Now,what would cold turkey be ?( apart from a sudden ice age befalling and freezing the activity of a very cumbersome european neighbour,alas,let us not dream)
The 40-50 years of estimated world oil resources can probably be extended another 30 with the exploitation of “heavy oils”,with a spectacular ecological result,but it still comes close to 80 years.
80 years may be cold turkey on the scale of history,but it doesn’t seem to be the
time table he’s talking about.
It seems the numerous offsprings of Kurt Vonnegut will be able to drive their car to work to pay,pay,pay for that Iraki bill…
Posted by george babushes on May 22, 2004 at 10:56 AM
The esteemed Mr. Vonnegut is, to my taste, the talent most akin to Emile Zola that American letters have been able to produce
That said, the careful observer Mr. V. repeats himself. There’s little except topical color in what he has written in “Cold Turkey” that differs from what he said in _Timequake_.
Still, “Cold Turkey” is worth publishing, because it excerpts this profoundly humane yet pessimistic author’s thought for those who haven’t been reading him for 40 years as many of us have!
Posted by JacquesDelaguerre on May 23, 2004 at 8:09 PM
My apologies for straying from the discussion of the essay. I just wanted to ask the author a question:
Mr. Vonnegut,
I’ve wanted to ask you a simple question for about 15 years now regarding your story, “Harrison Bergeron”. Is the main character’s name inspired by Henri Bergson?
Thanks,
Dan Florio
Posted by DanFlorio on May 24, 2004 at 10:35 AM
Hello Mr Vonnegut,
I hope you read these comments, but I think that you probably don’t since I hear you dislike computers. Personally, I think you need to give the internet more of a chance—it’s like colonial days all over again when people published pamphlets and articles anonymously and the printing press gave sudden forum to so many nimble minds.
Anyway, I love your books—I’ve read them all—and now can’t stop putting double dashes in nearly evey paragraph I write thanks to you! But what I wanted to comment on is your perspectives on providing child care and health care for eveyone and what Jesus would have thought about all of that. Of course he would have thought it a great idea—it was his after all, but the last thing he wanted was for government to do that job. What we need is not more government living under some sort of collective. Government only focuses on the “collect” part of collective. What we need is all of us with new ideas, forming cooperatives under our own design to provide for us in these ways. Jesus was the first libertarian. He wanted us to recognize a kingdom of God and a kingdom of man. The Romans, the Pharisees; they were the kingdom of man. WE are the kingdom of God.
We enter this world with free will and it is the basis of sin and redemption. Free will is the most basic and central Christian value. Governments on the other hand, deal in coercion. Governments don’t like free will and Jesus don’t like governments. We need to pull together as human beings in cooperatives and not care what the rich folks do. It’s the power of the government to take our money, skim their share, and then give back a pittance that even makes it possible to fight two wars on two fronts 4000 miles away.
And your son is right.
Posted by highlonesome on May 24, 2004 at 1:01 PM
Hello Mr. Kurt Vonnegut
I thought some comments may give you a glimmer of hope for a humane and reasonable America before you do the big check out.
Our leaders are power-drunk but leaders can only lead where they have followers. The underlying problem is the support of the followers are consumption-drunk. The followers will do anything to protect their consumption.
While the corporations and government are not telling the truth they aren’t lying either. The people in these organizations really believe what they think. The people outside the organizations believe what the think. These and many other two opposing world views neutralize each other. This symmetry occurs over and over in human belief systems forming stable systems.
Today the global culture is addicted to fossil fuels but this has only been going on for a century and there are alternatives. What is deeply inbreded in our belief systems is the dependent on population growth which has been going on unabated for the last 10,000 years.
This is where the symmetry driving humanity can be broken. We know that the fertility rate of females is a function of education. By insuring that every human has access to the cultural innovations of reading, mathematics and music the fertility rate will drop for a time below the rate needed for replacement .
Our current system of socailization is totally inadaqunet for this task. The proposed solution for reducing the global population is preparing a small group of children for an information subsistence mode by enhancing early childhood development. The core system is the Urban Camp a series of 72 sites one for each month in a child’s life from 0 to 6. While all dimensions of childhood development will be addressed the greatest link between the industrial age and information age is in the area of intellectual development. The urban camp will enable children to decode reading, writing, language, math and music as part and simultaneously with their native language. The generic name of this system will be the Corporate Family Village.
Posted by pulsar on May 25, 2004 at 10:16 AM
“The first recorded zero is attributed to the Babylonians in the 3rd century BC. A long period followed when no one else used a zero place holder. But then the Mayans, halfway around the world in Central America, independently invented zero in the fourth century CE. The final independent invention of zero in India was long debated by scholars, but seems to be set around the middle of the fifth century. It spread to Cambodia around the end of the 7th century. From India it moved into China and then to the Islamic countries. Zero finally reached western Europe in the 12th century.”
- From “A Brief History of Zero” by Kristin McQuillin
Just to set the record straight…
Oh, and totalitarian rule is not specific to communism - which is more an economic system than a form of government (though admittedly economics and government often go hand in hand). It can manifest itself in any system in which the people are either deprived of OR ABJURE the power that they have.
Posted by Anti on May 25, 2004 at 11:33 AM
I am the spouse of a civilian contractor in Iraq. What many of you would refer to as a “Mercenary”
I have a support group created for other contractors and their supporters. this venture has widely opened my eyes to the state the entire world is in. I have read more and learned more in the last 2 months than I have in a lifetime!
Prior to my awakening, the topic of the day was what happened on ER. Pretty sad indeed when you think about how many high school students are clueless as to what is going on in the world around them not to mention the adults who drive by me in their cars who are more worried about their IRA than the state of the nation.
I am amazed at the wisdom contained in Mr. Vonneguts post. At my ripe old age of 36 I already reconize the corruption of our political system and our society. I truly feel blessed to have attained even an ounce of the wisdom Mr. Vonnegut posseses.
I wish I had contributers such as him to my forum
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/civiliansinraq
I have about 91 members and I am continuosly being chastized for openly expressing my opinion, both good and bad. Mr. Vonnegut may want to reconsider his opinion of the interent. There are many who would like to hear what he has to say!
Posted by soldierswife35 on Jun 1, 2004 at 12:24 PM
As a couple of people have already pointed out, the zero we use today was discovered in India. Not just zero, but in fact the basis of algebra too. It is credited to the Arabs because that was from whom the Europeans received it. However, as Al Khwarizmi himself states in his treatise on Algebra much of the material he was presenting was based on earlier Hindu (Indian) work. Florian Cajori, in his book a History of Mathematics states pretty much the same thing. Just to set another record straight.
cheers
Posted by Da Man on Jun 8, 2004 at 5:49 AM
Ah, yes, humanity at its finest.
Here we are, faced not only with the opportunity to respond directly to the ideas of a celebrated yet controversial author, but also to openly discuss urgent national and global issues, and what do we do?
Waste time and valuable life debating the curious adventures of that encouragable lil’ fella, Zero.
Whether or not Mr. Vonnegut is mistaken concerning the origins of zero is irrelevent; the point he was making, at least as I in my feeble abilities understand it, is that Arabic, or better yet Islaamic, cultures have made many, many valuable contributions to the world at large. This should suggest that, and maybe I’m just being crazy here, they deserve better than to be characterized as “The guys who never, ever pitch in for the pizza bill.” Arabic people have made and continue to make useful contributions, and to villify their entire culture based on the actions of a few extremists is ever so slightly pig-headed.
But, like I said, I could be wrong.
Oh, and about the whole corruption of power applying only to totalitarian-states-thing: depending on who you ask, America could very easily be seen as a Totalitarian state. Power is, after all, available in more capacities than just government. For example, one might equate sprawling corporations to Totalitarian systems. Imagine, a single company that accounts for almost all of America’s agricultural commerce on every level. Lets just call this “imaginary” monster ConAgra. Now lets pretend that this boogeyman controls virtually every company that is interested in buying Mr. Brown’s cattle - and therefore has complete control over how much it will pay him, regardless of whether it is enough to actually give Mr. Brown a profit, let alone enough to allow him to sustain his ranch, his home or his family. Lets also pretend that this beast does the same for chicken ranches, potato farms, etc. Now lets pretend that these products are then processed in plants fully operated by common workers with little or no education and from poor economic backgrounds, often in towns where the entire economy is based on the existence of said plants. It would be very difficult for these workers, with little understanding of their rights, and with the spectre of being fired, getting a pay-cut, or even the closing of the plant and the ensuing collapse of the town constantly flying over their heads, to in anyway protest their conditions. In such a situation, and especially in a capitalist system which operates simply on the notion that profit = success, it is rather difficult to believe that those few in charge of the behemoth, which in turns can effect so many lives, would not be corrupted by that power - especially when millions or even billions are to be made. Now, just for some zest, lets also pretend that there are multiple corporations such as these that operate in different fields, such as Oil, Steel, Finance, Retail, or any other such “industry,” and that these different corporations often overlap and even have many shared executives. Finally, lets pretend that these same executives, who already have almost absolute control over so many lives, are incestuous with politicians, giving enormous contributions to particular candidates, creating political organizations that wield unbelievable poloitical sway, and even often having politicians simultaneously serving as executives. Were all this a reality (thank goodness its “not”), it would not be difficult to see how it is a totalitarian state, one in which absolute power does, in fact, corrupt absolutely. It would also not be hard to see how an unrestricted “free enterprise” system can lead to exactly the opposite - just see Wal-Mart, ConAgra, Time-Warner, etc. When these business amalgams become so powerful as to be able to destroy all competition, one is once again left in a system that has little choice and that is heavily influenced by only a few people.
Damnit.
Posted by HanktheHobo on Jun 9, 2004 at 6:51 PM
And one more thing - as far as fossil fuel lasting another 80 years, I agree with you. FUCK all future generations; fuck ‘em right in the ear. 80 years? Wow, thats one Kurt Vonnegut! That’s probably going to be about the time of my Grandkids, I estimate. Oh well, at least I had convenience. I mean, it’s not like I can do anything now, like, say, oh, I don’t know…begin researching cheaper, more effective, and replenishable fuels! It’s not like there are already people doing research on this with little to no funding or support, and it’s not like there are already hybrid cars that use about half the gas. I’ll make sure and steer clear of all that liberal-tree-hugging caca. After all, that has turned out so well in all past civilization vs. nature scenarios, like that town in Japan that had all the industrial poisons poured into its drinking/food supply, or for Chernobyl, or for all of London, which is covered in a lovely shade of soot. And out of curiosity, does this 80 year supply include Texas and Alaska? ‘Cuz, as a Texan (more specifically a Houstonian), I know I haven’t seen nearly enough petro-chemical complexes and oil refineries releasing God knows what into the air. And I can’t wait until all the attention the Middle East gets over its oil industry is focused on my home town! Yay! International malarkey for everyone! I can’t wait!
That out of the way, I would like to say that Mr. Vonnegut’s work is a personal favorite of mine, and if anyone knows how I could contact him, or if my tirades have perked your interest (or your wrath), please e-mail me.
rttam@hotmail.com
May you all die peacefully in your sleep, or possibly whilst having sex.
Posted by HanktheHobo on Jun 9, 2004 at 6:56 PM
So far there are 10 entries on this thread (not including mine, which isn’t up yet). The only one I wasn’t sorry I wasted my time reading was the one citing A Brief History of Zero. Another illumination of another lie my teachers told me. I’m going to have to add McQuillin to my reading list.
The rest of you are full of shit. All typical misinformed half-truths and fallacies of logic. Educate yourselves. And hurry up about it. This world needs improving. We can start by improving ourselves.
I’m going to get back to doing my part.
Thanks, Anti, whoever you are, for providing the rare thrill of illumination.
I guess I’ll make a reccomendation.
A History of God by Karen Armstrong
ok, two.
Lies My Teacher Told Me: Everything Your American History Textbook Got Wrong by James W. Loewen
Posted by mrandmrsjohnqsmith on Jun 12, 2004 at 9:25 AM
Ok, I feel a little guilty about saying you were all full of shit. I mean, you are full of shit, and so am I. That’s no reason to throw in the towel. You mean well, and so do I. Don’t take it too hard. Some of you have good ideas. I think the underlying message so far in this thread is that we all have a good deal of self-education to catch up on.
And zero is as good a place as any to start.
Posted by mrandmrsjohnqsmith on Jun 16, 2004 at 7:24 AM
Re: http://www.inthesetimes.com/site/main/discuss/cold_turkey/
Agree with the statement by highlonesome (May 24, 2004): “Free will is the most basic and central Christian value”.
Mr. Kurt Vonnegut’s article: “Cold Turkey” (May 10, 2004), is a good introduction to the problem of evil, and hence a good segue to the esoteric Christian study of evil in our modern world.
Freedom implies making choices between good and evil. However, without the fall in the Garden of Eden (Genesis 2:16-17), man would never had the possibility of developing freedom (choosing between good and evil), and without freewill, there is no possibility of developing love, which was God’s ultimate goal for mankind.
You can only love someone, if you do it out of your freewill. God didn’t want a host of automatons (robots, androids, humanoids, zombies) obeying, worshiping, loving him. That’s not real love. Rather, he wanted us to obey, worship, and love him out of our own freedom and ability to think for ourselves (rationally, logically, etc.).
“We love him, because he first loved us.” (1 John 4:19)
“But God commendeth his love toward us, in that, while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us.” (Romans 5:8)
Continued recommended Christian esoteric studies:
http://steinerbooks.com/search/search.php?q=evil&x=60&y=2
http://www.steinerbooks.org/detail.html?id=1902636104
http://www.steinerbooks.org/detail.html?id=1855840464
http://www.steinerbooks.org/detail.html?id=0863152600
http://www.steinerbooks.org/detail.html?id=0904693945
http://www.steinerbooks.org/detail.html?id=0940262908
http://www.steinerbooks.org/detail.html?id=0877851476
http://www.steinerbooks.org/detail.html?id=188860221x
http://www.steinerbooks.org/detail.html?id=0877853991
http://www.steinerbooks.org/detail.html?id=1902636295
Posted by sleuthhounddog on Jun 18, 2004 at 9:07 AM
God (or whatever it is) bless Kurt Vonnegut.
Just a couple of notes:
Regardless of where zero came from, the numerals we use today are called Arabic numerals. And yes, I think the point was that Arabs have made significant positive contributions to humanity, even if another misguided Abrahamic religion isn’t one of them.
Anyone who thinks America can’t become a totalitarian state is a fool.
“If fascism came to America, it would be on a program of Americanism.”—Huey Long.
Take a hard look around; it’s happening now.
And for all the good that Jesus Christ tried to convey, Christianity has been his unfortunate legacy. Most of the horror humans have perpetrated against each other is rooted in someone believing he knew—beyond all doubt—what God wanted.
Cheers.
Posted by merklee on Jun 25, 2004 at 6:57 PM
Amongst my favorite authors are Salinger, Voltaire, and yes, you Mr. Kurt Vonnegut. i love these authors because they offer me an intelligent, and realistic view of the world and the human state, which, in all it’s pessimism offers me a twisted ray of hope. hope that stems from knowing that i’m not the only one who feels, thinks and observes this world the way we do. Through all the valid points brought up in this article, i have to say i was a bit dissappointed (imagine a no name english major dissappointed in one of his favorite authors but regardless, when i saw this on a friends site, i was exited. as i read on though i got the impression of an intelligent but rage filled college kid who decided to vent his angers and frusterations on some internet post. it just seemed to lack any focus or point, and i guess it was sort of weird to see a hero who wrote novels of social commentary come out and spill his thoughts without the costume of metaphore. almost like Jimi Hendrix giving a speech on the politics in Vietanam, instead of playing MAchine Gun. if i can offer one thing that has always brought me out of the depression that comes from living in this world, and then realizing it, salingers “franny and zooey” Mr Vonnegut i thank you for your writings and yous spirit, and i wish you happiness and peace.
Posted by Mike Ulanski on Jul 2, 2004 at 8:08 AM
You’re an English major and you don’t know how to spell “exciting”?
You also open a parenthetical and never close it.
AND - while I’m sure it’s a stylistic “choice” (i.e. you’re aping e.e. cummings) - I hate it when people don’t capitalize their I’s. Especially people as self-important as you.
Softening your “criticism” with an “I love Vonnegut” qualification and some new age-y bullshit about wishing him happiness and peace doesn’t make you seem any less a complacent schmuck. Just a benevolent one.
Vonnegut may sound like “an intelligent but rage filled college kid who decided to vent his angers and frusterations [sic] on some internet post” but - in terms of fundamental mechanics and style, if nothing else - he’s got it all over you, sir.
American academia in action, ladies and gentlemen…
And we wonder why the President’s a moron…
Posted by Anti on Jul 2, 2004 at 8:30 AM
drive less with your stupid,stinky and clumsy vehicles.
take back all your fucking assholesoldiers,nobody needs them.
draw and paint more!
painting curses for veterans and soldiers….or ikebana…or cooking…fuck your fastfood…
in German:Nimm Dir Zeit und nicht das Leben.
Posted by paperbasquetboy on Jul 8, 2004 at 4:04 AM
I enjoyed it.
Thank you.
Posted by William Chandler on Jul 8, 2004 at 3:18 PM
I didn’t realize until now how sad and cynical Kurt Vonnegut was. His article has absolutely zero (<- another reference!) uplifting or positive comments on the human condition. I hope to avoid this particular “wisdom” as I approach 81.
Posted by chuck on Jul 9, 2004 at 8:03 AM
Confuscius may have said “do unto others…” But here are some things Jesus said. They are not in the retaliatory sense that Confucius implies…
Joh 15:12 This is my commandment, That ye love one another, as I have loved you.
Mat 22:37 Jesus said unto him, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind.
Mat 22:38 This is the first and great commandment.
Mat 22:39 And the second is like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.
Mat 22:40 On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets.
I am sorry many of us “Christians” do not live like Jesus intended (especially me)...
Posted by MIke on Jul 9, 2004 at 10:24 AM
I’ve never heard of Confucius’ teachings referred to as being in a “retaliatory sense.” Can you explain what you mean by that?
Posted by mrandmrsjohnqsmith on Jul 9, 2004 at 5:25 PM
rage on o mighty warrior.
Posted by amelia on Jul 13, 2004 at 1:17 PM
I just hope Mr. Vonnegut is not angry or bitter.
I’ll vouch for you, Kurt.
You’ve done much good.
And the world is still a beautiful place.
Who knows how this will end?
i too think Mel Gibson is a ridiculous fellow…
but he helped give us one of my favorite cinema lines of all time…
“The Lord tells me he can get me out of this situation… but He’s pretty sure you’re fucked!”
Posted by just a guy on Jul 21, 2004 at 12:47 AM
So little time so many wrongs to right. I for one am heartened to read the passionate resolve of a human being who has provided me with such dizzying hights and soul scraping mires with his astounding literary gift.
Thank you Mr Vonnegut. Thanks for everything.
GWA
Posted by GWA on Jul 24, 2004 at 8:54 PM
On the subject of our planet, it is a beautiful place, that has to put up with the most misguided animals the planet has ever seen.
Take note of the below or as Kurt Vonnegut would say “LISTEN:”
1. Religion kills, so keep it between your God and yourself.
2. Patriotism kills, so dump it in the toilet.
3. There is only one reason why we are here, regardless of how we came about. We are here to help each other. Do not abuse the planet and all the animals that inhabit it. Once you have accomplished all this, then talk about your God. My guess is that your God will not be bothered with you spreading the word, as you have done what he expects from you… respect life!
Wake up each day and know that millions of people are suffering. Wake up and realise that you know nothing about them or their suffering and that you are not free, have no free will because you gave it to the tele. Switch on the tele and drown out the horror which you are so well at ignoring even though that horror goes against all that which is good about being human, which if you give some though to, will destroy you. But you choose to ignore that horror. It will destroy you anyway, because man is in essence a good creature and wants to do good.
And for you Americans ( I apologise for the extremely general term). You do not come from another planet. You are not any better than other nations. You are not special and your constitution was not inspired by Martian air balloons. It has its roots firmly embedded in European civilization. So stop the crap about American democracy or the first amendment . You have no rights. You gave them up when you were born. Now grow up and be of use!
Posted by Watson on Aug 3, 2004 at 2:22 AM
Probably foremost, the lack of hierarchy in the Native societies in the eastern United States attracted the admiration of European observers. Frontiersmen were taken with the extent to which Native Americans enjoyed freedom as individuals. Women were also accorded more status and power in most Native societies than in white societies of the time, which white women noted with envy in captivity narratives. Although leadership was substantially hereditary in some nations, most Indian societies north of Mexico were much more democratic than Spain, France, or even England in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries. ...
We have seen how Native ideas of libery, fraternity, and equality found their way to Europe to influence social philosophers such as Thomas More, Locke, Montaigne, Montesquieu, and Rousseau. These European thinkers then influenced Americans such as Franklin, Jefferson, and Madison. In recent years historians have debated whether Indian ideas may also have influenced our democracy more directly. Through 150 years of colonial contact, the Iroquois League stood before the colonies as an object lesson in how to govern a large domain democratically. ...
In the 1740s the Iroquois wearied of dealing with several often bickering English colonies and suggested that the colonies form a union similar to the league. In 1754 Benjamin Franklin, who had spent much time among the Iroquois observing their deliberations, pleaded with colonial leaders to consider the Albany Plan of Union. ...
The colonies rejected the plan. But it was a forerunner of the Articles of Confederation and the Constitution. ...
John Mohawk has argued that American Indians are directly or indirectly responsible for the public-meeting tradition, free speech, democracy, and “all those things which got attatched to the Bill of Rights.” Without the Native example, “do you really believe that all those ideas would have found birth among a people who had spent a millennium butchering other people because of intolerance of questions of religion?” Mohawk may have overstated the case for Native democracy, since heredity played a major role in office-holding in many Indian societies. His case is strengthened, however, by the fact that wherever Europeans went into the Americas, they projected monarchs (“King Phillip”) or other undemocratic leaders onto native societies. To some degree, this projecting was done out of European self-interest, so they could claim to have purchased tribal land as a result of dealing with one person or faction. The practice also betrayed European thought: Europeans could not believe that nations did not have such rulers, since that was the only form of government they knew.
For a hundred years after our Revolution, Americans credited Native Americans as a source of their democratic institutions.
—excerpts from the chapter titled, “Red Eyes,” from “Lies My Teacher Told Me, Everything Your American History Textbook Got Wrong” by James W. Loewen
Posted by mrandmrsjohnqsmith on Aug 3, 2004 at 9:11 AM
A couple of decades ago, a company called Mayfair published a dark superhero game called “Underground”, the only rpg which actively advocated the overthrow of the American government, albiet a dystopic version that had had the likes of Rush Limbaugh as President. One of the accessories that came with the game was a pad of “Free Speech” applications. The idea beign that your character was to use these to submit proposed Free Speech for approval.
Now as I write this and the Democratic Convention in Boston is winding down, the most memorable artifact to me was the creation of what has been dubbed the “Free Speech Containment Zone”
Have we become accepting enough of fascism that it no longer needs the pretense of being different?
Posted by Frank Lazar on Aug 3, 2004 at 11:06 AM
“Have we become accepting enough of fascism that it no longer needs the pretense of being different?”
Yes.
Folks, the only essential difference between America c. 2004 and Germany c. 1939 is the that the Germans had way better looking uniforms.
“There is only one reason why we are here, regardless of how we came about. We are here to help each other.”
Actually, I think the only reason we are here is to have sex and make more of us. Sure, that’s a lame raison d’etre, but there it is.
“On the subject of our planet, it is a beautiful place…”
Let’s see, you live on a planet the conditions of which you are uniquely adapted to survive in. You are just tolerant enough to UV that it doesn’t kill you instantly. You are adapted to breathe just the air that is present. You are adapted to drink water which appears in abundance. You are adapted to eat and process other living creatures, which, in turn, are adapted to eat you. I guess you would consider it “beautiful.”
But then, a pile of shit is probably a beautiful world to fecal coliforms.
Posted by Hunter Moon on Aug 3, 2004 at 6:48 PM
To Hunter Moon.
Go to a little country called Laos. Mothers sell their young daughters for USD 10. If you have children, how does that make you feel?
Try to avoid eastern countries though. Fucking young little girls is such fun! Go to India. Whole families are born into debt. Their kids have to work for years to pay off family debt. If you have no kids, forget it. Go on fucking like crazy.
The planet is beautiful, but of course if you have a better suggestion or have grand schemes to re-invent the eco system, let the world know.
Try not to obliterate this one though.
Posted by Watson on Aug 5, 2004 at 6:18 AM
About the ‘games’ that we are born in to. As humans we tend toward extremes to define our selves, then try to label others with our label, or the “evil” opposite.
Jesus told us to ‘love our neighbor’ then told a story to show that anyone in need is our neighbor. He also said ‘Blessed are the Peace makers.’
Both of those statements ask us to be the fulcrum between the extremes. To reach out in all directions to bring balance.
Let’s do it! Let’s work for Peace and understanding between the extremes.
Posted by Lee Xavier on Aug 6, 2004 at 11:30 AM
Dear Kurt,
Thanks for writing something again. I missed you. Kilgore Trout said “Life is something I wouldn’t wish on an animal.” If this is your E=mc2 then you are the Einstein of the Age of Anxiety.
Your article was published in a tiny newpaper. I gave it to my wife. She read it and quickly moved on to the other articles about shamanism, now pronounced “Shahhhhhmanism” to separate it from the “Shaymanism” we learned in our Anthropology careers and other subjects which I now refer as “booga-booga” ideas. That is not an original expression. I stole it from our older son, who is now in heaven, because as a cross between the blackest of Africans and the whitest of Germans, he had great disdain for black people who ran naked through jungles. To him they were “booga-booga” and had weird ideas of which he wanted no part given that white people build bridges, dams and nuclear weapons and black people in jungles just roll their eyes and throw spears. Our son hated being black, something we tried to undo in a hundred ways, but we were defeated by the incredible power of our culture’s lack of empathy.
The little newspaper is so chock full of booga-booga that it is really a kind of boring pornography, just the kind of place where Kilgore Trout loved to publish. This version of pornography has titles like “How the Mind can Defeat Time”, “Genetic Reconstruction of Your Beliefs”, “Understanding Your Child Through Astrology” and so on. You have finally become Kilgore.
My wife has now spoken in defense of this magazine. She believes that a positive attitude and belief in various kinds of magic will spread from person to person and make the world a better place. I suppose it all depends on where the truth resides and I don’t see humanity doing any better than it has done before, which is been nasty, back-stabbing, greedy and plug ugly in a thousand more ways. By the way, the term “plug ugly” comes your very own adopted city of New York when during the mid 1800’s each gang was associated with a private firehouse. While a home burned, one of the gang would sit on the fire plug taking dibs until their horse drawn fire gizmo arrived and then you, the helpless owner, had to negotiate a price with the rest of the gang while your house burned down. Nice people. Maybe everyone should have joined hands and prayed for the fire to go out.
Booga-booga.
You referred to Jesus Christ in you article. This reference always irks me, perhaps because of my Jewishness. Contrary to popular belief, “Christ” wasn’t his last name. Of course “Christ” means “messiah” I never use it.
Regardless, the world today would have made him weep.
I am leaving for Peru soon. The Incas, by the way, got high on human sacrifice. The Aztecs took the cake. Approximately 20,000 people per year were sacrificed by the Aztec royalty. Captives were taken to the top of pyramids where their hearts were ripped out. Then the bodies were tossed down the steps. Nice people, these noble savages. But there was protein to be had. Montezuma himself was reported to have been partial to cooked human thighs served with tomatoes and chili pepper sauce.
Jesus wept. Booga-booga.
I recall that perhaps you went through Transcendental Meditation training back around 1970. I believe that one of the characters in “Breakfast of Champions”, Duane Hoover’s son Bunny, was a practitioner. Duane had bad chemicals and smashed his boy’s face into a piano keyboard.
That little, squeaky voiced Maharishi was very popular. He came on Johnny Carson quite often, perhaps even more than Tiny Tim. Remember how we got initiated? We brought flowers, a piece of fruit and a handkerchief and in turn, after much booga-boogaing, we were given our mantras. I still remember mine and the strict warning I was given about ever saying it out loud. The TM people finally discredited themselves by claiming that they could fly. I saw an early video tape of this and all they did was bounce around on big pillows like frogs on a hot plate.
“Ah-ING-gah” was my mantra. It isn’t that this word hasn’t been useful. Sometimes I start it rotating in my head and it gets going by itself and then I can go to sleep. But I can also go to sleep without it. I had hopes of reaching Pure Consciousness back in those days but now I think that even if everyone could the world would just turn into a big India with people defecating in the streets and starving while letting cows eat their vegetables.
May you be blessed, kept and lonesome no more,
S. Michael Florian
Posted by S. Michael Florian on Aug 7, 2004 at 7:46 PM
Is it me?
Or are the vast majority of people who post on this site a bunch of inarticulate, ideologically demented, stark-raving lunatics!?!
I’m not sure if this speaks ill of Vonnegut’s readership or the subscription base of inthesetimes.com
Regardless, I’m truly frightened by the notion that so many of you are REAL people, who are actually ALIVE out there and… well, we can hardly call it “thinking”... but BELIEVING what you write here.
I’m not a big proponent of mood altering medications, but if you people aren’t (unsuccessfully) attempting satire in these posts, you may want to look into it…
Posted by Anti on Aug 9, 2004 at 7:44 AM
It’s you.
Posted by S. Michael Florian on Aug 9, 2004 at 7:48 AM
Whew! What a relief!
Are you sure, though? Really?
By the way, that last post was far more coherent and balanced than your previous one. So I’ll at least say that I’m not so worried about YOU anymore.
As for the others… Well… You said it best.
Booga-booga!
Posted by Anti on Aug 9, 2004 at 12:23 PM
S. Michael, Anti, just remember:
South Korea’s got Seoul
North Dakota likes it on top
Jersey girls aren’t trash (trash gets picked up)
New Mexico is cleaner than regular Mexico
and
Without Me, it’s just “Aweso”
Grumble.
Posted by Ammonia D on Aug 9, 2004 at 3:05 PM
To Watson:
“Go to a little country called Laos. Mothers sell their young daughters for USD 10. If you have children, how does that make you feel?
Try to avoid eastern countries though. Fucking young little girls is such fun! Go to India. Whole families are born into debt. Their kids have to work for years to pay off family debt. If you have no kids, forget it. Go on fucking like crazy.”
Do you really think you need to go half way around the world to find this? Just a year or so ago in Middletown, Ohio a mother sold her daughter for a pack of cigarettes.
Catholic priests right here in the good old West boff kids every day and have been doing it for centuries, apparently, not to mention all the other degenerates who have sex with children.
My point was more straight-forward, though. I was saying that the only real reason we are here is to make more of us. The same is true of dogs, cats, and ants. Everything else is just a side effect, but not a reason.
Posted by Hunter Moon on Aug 9, 2004 at 9:18 PM
No reason whatsoever, eh? I can’t believe I’m entertaining this, but I am always tempted to pick the brain of one who refuses to acknowledge the existence or even the possibility of anything divine, and does so with such an absolute, authoritative tone. Also I accidentally clicked the unsubscribe link, and now I need to post something more to get back on the notification list. (I take back what I said before about being sorry I read your entries, you nuts. We should never regret reading, even if it’s jibba jabba. It’s a battle of principles and impulses.)
So, WHY do we need to make more of us?
Before you reply, consider what I’m asking. Don’t just tell me we’re hardwired for survival. I’m asking you WHY we are.
Now I can receive more notifications of posts from frutcakes. Goody. Mmmm….fruuuitcaaaake….
Posted by mrandmrsjohnqsmith on Aug 10, 2004 at 5:34 PM
Vonnegut like all atheists is ultimately reduced to thinking of human beings as a mass of nerve fibers and protoplasm and of human consciousness as electrochemical static accidentally created by brain cells. This describes his wife (wives?) and children to I assume? A gospel of dirt as Thomas Carlyle wrote.
The Passion of the Christ is a better Hollywood movie then most. Certainly better then the kind Mr. Vonnegut gets paid for.
He obviously doesn’t know anything about conservatism as practiced by G.K. Chesterton, C.S. Lewis and other authentic conservatives instead mouthing the predictable litany of milksop parlor room liberalism he’s known for.
Mr. Vonnegut is honest enough to note the disjunction between his Maoist convictions and what he acknowledges as “great literature” (we know what happens to great literature when Maoists are in charge along with religion).
So which is true the best that has been thought and said in the world and therefore the history of the human spirit or Mr. Vonnegut?
Posted by A Conservative on Aug 10, 2004 at 7:47 PM
The Passion of Christ is another Hollywood film created to get the masses into the cinema. It is another fantastic example of what lengths greedy people will go to, to show a film. People who go and watch the film come out of the cinema’s crying. They are literally touched by the anguish and betrayal that Jesus suffered.
Well what about almost half the worlds population which lives on less than 2 bucks a day people? What about the prostitutes that get sold from one establishment to another. Slaves for the rest of their lives if AIDS does not take them before.
Do you honestly believe that these people do not suffer and more so physically than Jesus? We will go to the cinema and be devastated by the Passion of Christ, but we do not even blink an eye or take a moment to consider the suffering which is all around us now at this very moment and not over 2000 years ago.
We are all so full of selective morality it is sickening.
Hold a minutes silence for Sept 11 and the few thousand people that died. Do not even shed a moments thought for the 800,000 and more people that were killed in Rwanda in 100 days. Or the earth quake that killed 5 times the amount of people than Sept 11 just a couple of months back, mmm must be something wrong as I can not remember where.
This is your planet and the people that inhabit it are your people.
Stop being so awfully American. You of all nations have the power and the possibility to do good. Now do it, because until now you have supported a government which has invaded numerous countries and killed (can we say millions yet?). You are also the only country which have use a nuclear bomb against another country. Is this statement wrong?
As one great man says. “SHAME ON YOU”
Thank God for Mr. Moore
ps. And for the boys and girls (Anti, Florian etc) I apologise for breaking your crayons. Must be my education and not paying attention in English classes
Posted by Watson on Aug 11, 2004 at 6:38 AM
Dear “A Conservative” :
“So which is true the best that has been thought and said in the world and therefore the history of the human spirit or Mr. Vonnegut?”
If you are using Mr. Vonnegut in reference of atheism, and therefore practically every scientist since the decline of Christian censorship, then I will have to go with Vonnegut.
But I’ll get back to that in a minute.
Simply because Vonnegut does not adhere to the “conservatism” of C.S. Lewis, G. K. Chesterton, ad nauseum, does not make him unaware of it. We atheists, unlike theists, are not afraid of other ideologies simply because they challenge our own. In fact, atheism (which is not an ideology at all, but rather a conclusion that is supported by such things as “science” and “logic,” the kinds of things most churches dismiss as poppycock) is based largely on disagreement and argument. Using such crazy things as “Dialogue,” we try to discern the truth by reason, rather than committing to a strict set of rules that, although handed down from divinity, change every couple of decades.
You want to see what I am talking about? mrandmrsjohnqsmith and A Conservative both serve good examples - mrandmrs(...) continuously calls everyone here nuts and fruitcakes, as wall as referring to all ideas differing from his(hers) as “jibba jabba.” All this of course, without any substantiation as to why it is, or even which arguments are “jibba jabba,” and without advancing any new argument (a question is not an argument).
Meanwhile, A Conservative (with a name that says it all - you apparently need to identify yourself with a certain set of ideas so badly that you automatically label yourself as such) dismisses Vonnegut’s (as well as everyone else’s) arguments as a “predictable litany of milksop parlor liberalism.” Just a personal insight: arguments that hinge on identifying something as liberal or conservative, and therefore evil or good, rarely have any actual merit. Labeling arguments as such is the same as calling a chair a chair - it is not positive or negative, it is simply a name. The only weight this kind of argument has is in appealing to pre-concieved biases, i.e. “it’s conservative, I’m liberal, therefore I don’t like it.” Historically, doing such is terribly Christian in nature; for example, labeling all non-christian religions as “witchcraft”, and using that as justification for burning hundreds of thousands of innocents, or the same set-up, only this time labeling them as “heretics,” etc, etc, etc.
Many theists claim the very same argument already made on this postboard - that atheists simply refuse to accept the existence of a divine being. This is another characteristic of most Christians, the immediate assumption that they are correct and everyone else must be wrong. If one is unwilling to accept even the slight possibility, no matter how miniscule of a chance there is, that one is wrong, then there can be no valid argument, only one person repeatedly accusing the other of not listening, while doing the exact same thing. This is reminiscient of my childhood arguments with my brothers - “yes, no, yes, no, yes, no, uh-huh, uh-uh, yeah-ha, nuh-uh”, and on and on. This isn’t “arguing,” it is restating your thesis over and over again.
The point is this: I am willing to accept that I may be wrong (on any level, spiritual, political, Simpson’s Trivia, or whatever else), but I demand actual evidence of such - keep in mind that faith is not evidence. In fact, faith, by definition, is belief without facts. If you choose to believe something “just because,” that’s fine with me, just don’t use a condescending attitude with othrs who don’t.
Oh, and Jesus may be Love, but God is rather violent:
“Behold, I will corrupt your seed and spread dung upon your faces…” Malachi 2:3
“I will strew your flesh upon the mountains, and fill the valleys with your carcass. I will drench the land even to the mountains with your flowing blood…” Ezekiel 32:5
(Oop, I forgot, this is the Old Testament God - before his random mood alteration.)
Posted by HanktheHobo on Aug 11, 2004 at 6:53 AM
To HanktheHobo,
Thanks for that. I so dearly wanted to say just that to the moron but lack the eloquence and insight.
To Mr. Conservative,
Sorry for calling you a moron. Change your ideas about the world and its inhabitants. Try and respect all cultures and peoples and their religions of which some are older than the Bible.
Posted by Watson on Aug 11, 2004 at 8:02 AM
“Practically every scientist?” Check your sources. A quick Google search will do for starters, if you can’t put down your sci-fi long enough to stomach some non-fiction. At the very least you should find several links to the Reuters story on the survey from 1996. It was only a poll of U.S. scientists, but being a Texan, you can find that relevant. It found 39% believed in a personal God and another 15% were agnostic. Presumably a world survey would be a far more weighty undertaking. Actually accessing and polling a valid cross-section of the world’s scientific population alone would be a mammoth task. That doesn’t even begin to address the need for a more diverse questionnaire than the one in the Reuters report which was clearly a mere study of western monotheism.
And that’s “anything divine,” if you care to read as far back as three posts, not “divine being.” Try to transcend enough to see clearly why don’t you.
Your tone seems to carry a claim to some sort of high ground and gives us readers the impression that it will lift this thread out of the mire of blathered stream-of-consciousness rants with your “dialog” and “reason,” and into some sort of enlightened forum, but you do no such thing. You instead add yet another rant with no real direction aside from the high of seeing one’s thoughts asserted in an authoritative tone on a website for all to see. By reading your post, one might be fooled into deducing that atheists invented logic, reason and dialog, and have a corner on the market of science and free thinking. “Most churches?” I think you haven’t really done your homework. You are as guilty of spewing half-truths without backing them up as anyone else on this thread, and much more so than many.
Opinions are like assholes, Hank, everyone’s got one. You are a nutty fruitcake, get used to it. Things could be worse. Even if you agreed with me 100%, I’d still say you were a nut. Everyone’s crazy, it’s part of being human. The people who refuse to admit their insanity are the ones who go postal. Admit your are full of shit like the rest of us, Hank, before it’s too late.
Want a dialog? Here’s a question: Please tell us all what you meant by the expression, “that encouragable lil’ fella, Zero.” How exactly has zero been “encouraged,” please tell us all?
I hate to do this to you in front of a crowd and all, but you chose to make an example out of me. You singled me out and misquoted me. You clearly have mistaken me for someone else, pardner.
Now I’ll spend my precious time giving you an example of how you are unequivocally wrong, and not just a lousy speller:
“...depending on who you ask, America could very easily be seen as a Totalitarian state. Power is, after all, available in more capacities than just government.”
Sure, if by “depending on who you ask,” you mean “whether or not you ask someone who knows what a totalitarian state is.” Look up “totalitarian” in the dictionary. I’m not going to do your homework for you.
In support of your “argument” you forced us to sit through your imaginary sci-fi scenario of “a single company that accounts for almost all of America’s agricultural commerce on every level.” Then you talk a hole in our heads, and finally conclude with “Were all this a reality (thank goodness its “not”), it would not be difficult to see how it is a totalitarian state.” Well, thank goodness, it was all a dream!
What a formidable argument, Dorothy. You sure hacked that straw man to pieces.
Now, getting back to the real world, I just remembered that I have more important things to do than try to educate people who won’t bother to educate themselves. Until you have a valid argument, I will forgo wasting my valuable time forming a formidable retort.
Until that shining day…
Quitcho jibba jabba, FOO!
Posted by mrandmrsjohnqsmith on Aug 11, 2004 at 8:59 AM
Oh, well, the English student thinks you’re “eloquent.” Scuse me. heh.
Posted by mrandmrsjohnqsmith on Aug 11, 2004 at 9:05 AM
sounds like you are the one who is a confused, mrandmrsjohnqsmith. Tell us what you’re trying to prove, oh learned and enlightened one.
I saw nowhere earlier where hank attacked you, or maybe it was you calling the other posters full of shit that got his started? There’s other ways to make your point.
Now you’re trying to make up for it by calling yourself crazy as well.
Go troll somewhere else.
I think I’m going to go take a steaming mrandmrsjohnqsmith and use some Texas to wipe with before flushing.
Posted by stan on Aug 11, 2004 at 1:05 PM
Do a quick google search of what? This seems like a pretty open field, perhaps you could narrow that search down for me - perhaps an actual name of the survey or the year, or any other useful information (I’m not being sarcastic, I really am interested in seeing that). I have no reason to think you would lie about it, so we’ll go with it; the fault was mine. By saying all scientists, what I meant was the work done by scientists, a.k.a. modern science. The fact that so many pioneers in the fields that have, more than any others, advanced the idea of atheism are themselves theists is an interesting study in sociology and psychology. This is a good example of human beings’ need to have a metaphysical solution, a catch-all net that makes everything ok. We all fear death, so much that even a person who researches logic and tests laws of nature will rationalize a supernatural existence. Unfortunately, such an existence is impossible to prove by science - by its very nature, it is outside of natural laws, and therefore outside the realm of tests and observations. In other words, even though the scientists may convince themeselves of such an existence, they will also be the first to say that they can’t prove it.
This is also excluding the fact that polls and surveys are insanely inaccurate; there is no way of knowing if the population polled is an accurate representation of the entire research population (in this case, scientists in America), or if the subjects answer truthfully. It also depends on how the survey is done - is it interview, telephone, or perhaps mail? In any case, all have their own individual shortcomings. Regardless, surveys themselves offer only a rough starting point for research, and are certainly not used for absolute numbers or conclusions.
“Divine - of the nature of, proceeding from, or pertinent to God; sacred” (The New American Webster Dictionary, 1972)
“Anything divine” would inherently need a god to exist; thus, if there are no gods, there cannot be “anything divine,” pardner.
And what exactly am I transcending? There has to be something to transcend, I cannot simply “go beyond,” unless there is something specified for me to transcend.
Posted by HanktheHobo on Aug 11, 2004 at 1:52 PM
“Your tone seems to carry a claim to some sort of high ground and gives us readers the impression that it will lift this thread out of the mire of blathered stream-of-consciousness rants with your “dialog” and “reason,” and into some sort of enlightened forum, but you do no such thing.”
“Stream of consciousness - The total range of awareness and emotive-response of an individual, from the lowest pre-speech level to the highest fully articulated level of rational thought. The assumption is that in the mind of an individual at a given moment a stream of consciousness is a mixture of all the levels of awareness, an unending flow of sensations, thoughts, memories, associations, and reflections;...” (A Handbook to Literature, 7th ed., 1996)
I fail to see where that fits in to any prior posts here; I may just be another slow country boy, but at least I try to stick with terms I know. I also don’t claim to take the high ground, unless by that you mean that I refrain from littering my arguments with name-calling. I could end every sentence with ass-clown, but I won’t. And I don’t know exactly how directionless my “rant” is; to me, a directionless rant is more like calling everyone else crazy and then giving no reason why, or even offering any kind of real idea. As far as using an authoritative tone, perhaps you are referring to my confidence. Obviously I think I am right, or else I wouldn’t bother to present my thoughts. The difference between my “authoritative tone” and yours is that I have avoided using such condescending techniques as insults, and that I am willing to listen to other points of view.
I have merely pointed out that atheists utilize logic and dialogue, not faith. I wasn’t aware that saying a person uses or relies on something automatically suggests that they also invented it. I don’t believe the Japanese invented cars, although they use and build many of them, and I don’t believe that police invented guns, jails, or walkie-talkies. Perhaps you simply misunderstood the argument, but I don’t know where I say that we(atheists) invented any of those tools.
How much more backing up do you want, this is a post-board.
Posted by HanktheHobo on Aug 11, 2004 at 2:13 PM
Opinions are like assholes, how original.
You’re absolutely right - sort of. I did use the wrong word, although I didn’t actually spell it wrong. Encouragable is spelled correctly, it just isn’t the right word; what I meant was incorrigible, which is what we call a homonym, in which two words sound similar and are often (but not always) spelled the same, but have different meanings. So congratulations, I suppose incorrectly using a word totally destroys my argument, especially as it was not in a vital point of said argument. Wow, you really showed me. Well, I spelled that word right, but here are a few I didn’t: “othrs” and “poloitical,” as memory serves. Oh, no, it seems that even you are capable of occasionally committing this mortal sin, Mr. Frutcakes.
Every time I make a post, I sit back and wait for some diligent reader to point out the incorrect spellings and therefore invalidate my argument, so thank you very much.
By the way, zero can be encouragable in the same way that it can be incorrigible, through the magic of personification.
“I hate to do this to you in front of a crowd and all, but you chose to make an example out of me. You singled me out and misquoted me. You clearly have mistaken me for someone else, pardner.”
It’s pretty obvious to anyone that you quite enjoyed singling me out. However, I never singled you out - the fact that I mentioned others besides yourself makes that technically impossible, as you are no longer “single.”
I suppose taking a cheap shot at Texas culture makes your argument more poignant, but it doesn’t make it more valid. I only mentioned my home state to establish my proximity to the largest petrochemical complex in the country, and therefore my direct concern in the expanding of that already cumbersome complex.
“totalitarian - pertaining to a governemnt that suppresses opposition” (New Am. Web. Dic., 1972)
Hmmm, so by illustrating that major corporations control important government decisions through large grants, campaign funds, political sway, lobbying, and the manipulation of business ties (such as former or current executive officers) as well as the “Good Old Boy” network (this would include shooting down possible bills in Congress and in other political arenas, which in American democracy is the only true form of “opposition” we have, that would go against the well-being of those corporations), I haven’t proven anything? Not even enough shadow of a doubt to prevent you from declaring my argument “unequivocally” wrong? I didn’t make an absolute statement:
“...depending on who you ask, America could very easily be seen as a Totalitarian state. Power is, after all, available in more capacities than just government.”
The use of such apologetic words as “depending on” and “easily seen as” make the statement “unequivocally” equivocal. You cannot prove beyond any uncertainty that something cannot be seen as something else, therefore it is uncertain and ambiguous, left out for debate, not for an absolute, irrefutable truth. This is part of what we call a dialogue.
I am aware that the corporations themselves are not governments, and therefore cannot be a “totalitarian state;” the obvious, at least I thought obvious, connection is that these companies’ power in government causes the government itself to often behave in a fashion similar to a totalitarian state. This is only one example that I chose; I could also go into detail about COINTELPRO, in which the American government used its branches to investigate potentially innocent US citizens, and often take “counter” action against them, based on little more than their political affiliation.
I wouldn’t let you do my homework, so don’t worry - I like passing.
ConAgra and its percentage of the agricultural market is not “sci-fi,” its fact, or as you call it, the “real world.”
When you say I talk a hole in your head, this large amount of text, often in paragraph form and containing many words forming coherent sentences, is what we call “an argument.” With all the belly-aching you do about half-truths and no support, one would think you could do a better job of spotting supporting statements.
“What a formidable argument, Dorothy. You sure hacked that straw man to pieces.”
Like I said, a condescending attitude which tries to hide a complete lack of any substantial counter-argument. Just pish-posh intended to make others feel smaller than you. Very impressive, indeed.
Apparently, your “education” consists of reading “Lies My Teacher Told Me.” Congratulations, you read a book. There are a lot more out there, just waiting for you.
I’ll leave you with these wise words from my youth:
Take a look
Its in a book
Reading Rainbow
Posted by HanktheHobo on Aug 11, 2004 at 3:04 PM
My mistake, you most certainly did give a year on the survey. My apologies.
Posted by HanktheHobo on Aug 11, 2004 at 3:06 PM
When I started reading this thread it looked a promising one. Triggered by a piece of work from an old master, intelligent conversation, informative posts, acknowledgements and so on.
How is it though, that now that I’ve read through to the end of it, I fear the responses this post is going to get and I just can’t stand getting criticized on my spelling and vocabulary, punctuation and capitalization, style. Boohoo.
One KV character, a one time instructor in the army, has learned that using curse words gives people an excuse to ignore or dismiss your whole argument.
I think that’s brilliant, though of course, not using curse words is easier sometimes than speling corectly and expressing yourself eloquently.
To me it shows how we will resist change based on format alone. Form over function, the cover, not the book. We don’t even need to hear the message. We can just dismiss it outright if there is the least little thing we don’t like about it. The result of information overload.
And what is this unstopable urge to resist change?
About spelling: In fcat I raed an atrcile wihch calmis taht you can ietnrpert jmubeld wdros as lnog as the fsrit and lsat lteters are in palce.
So much for correct spelling.
I’m saying… in case you hadn’t noticed… let’s not fuss over details. We’ll get to those when it is time for implementation of the plan(?).
Broad strokes and general direction.
Why do conversations in threads like these become sooo personal soo often and why do arguments turn into conflicts where one has to attack and/or/to defend?
Insecurity, paranoia, over-sensitivity? The human condition. Our fragile ego’s.
That most narrow-minded faculty of our consciousness built for the sole purpose of focused interaction with the world, not for governing our lives. It is not equipped for this task. No wonder.
If you don’t like someone’s idea, culture, religion, color or whathaveyou, you don’t need to try and kill it. If you cannot bring a positive contribution - and these can include constructive criticism - then do not contribute at all, there are other areas where your energy might be more positively expressed. Live and let live and, as has been said before, help others where you can.
Needless to say (but then, so is most of this post, right), I’m a big fan of KV. His work has been quite a factor in shaping my life. He showed me that Santa Clause wasn’t real.
Unlike him perhaps, I remain hopeful and optimistic about our future. I think we should be all right, once we get past these things that cause us to start fighting on an internet messageboard, or in a desert in Iraque or wherever the hell else we can find some space to beat each other up. And there are waves in motion to help us see ways of doing just that. I think TM for instance, could actually be a contributing factor here.
Broaden our minds. For it is pettiness that we need to get past. How hard can that be? Who wants to be petty? Just let go.
Ah yes, but we are kept petty and small by the powers that be. Be they church or government or science or media. We are not encouraged to think beyond accepted parameters. So all we’d have to do is not accept the parameters. It is dangerous to venture out from under their wing. How else will we learn to fly. Our imaginations, fed by violence and rehashes of familiar themes, become limited too. Use media to shape imagination and we eat it all up. Supply and demand. Come on.
We respond to stimuli like pavlovian dogs. Financial insentive, punishment by law. I say again: Come on.
We are multi-dimensional beings, man. Give us food for dreams to make us soar high above the plains of pettiness where now we dwell. The great beyond within. People can fly.
We should stop accepting what they feed us. The parameters will change. Demand and supply.
We all enjoy or suffer the human condition. We change what we can and the rest, we learn to live with.
So I, being human like you, am in no position to judge you. Hell I don’t even know you. Let he who is without sin cast the first stone.
Not quite coherent, but enough to get the message across and at the same time cause your brain to deviate from regular patterns. This is to be encouraged.
Please don’t hate me for what I wrote, I couldn’t bear it. I didn’t mean to hurt you. I’m sorry if I did. And so on.
Have fun,
Alex
Posted by LX on Aug 12, 2004 at 5:58 AM
Hi,
I’m so happy that mr. Vonnegut is still out there with his sharp comments about the world - and the U.S. (hey, Europe is still out there - and a few other continents - just in case anybody have forgot…).
A lot of people in Europe share a lot of mr. Vonnegut’s views on the world today. I do. And like me I’m sure we’re many becoming more and more sad about the state of things - both in the world and in the U.S.
Oh, keep on for some more years mr. Vonnegut, please!
Good health.
Posted by Jan Konstmann on Aug 12, 2004 at 7:59 AM
Ting-a-ling!
Well, shame on you, Hank, for using “logic” and “dialogue” in your ranting! Don’t you know that automatically identifies you as a Marxist! Yes, that’s right a communist, something we Americans were all brought up to abhor. Especially when arguing with conservative Christians, the REAL Americans that would never question the spiritual and intellectual authority of their government, community or family. Geez!
The truth is, people, that there’s only one truth: the one, true history of the universe. Unfortunately, none of us are old enough to remember it all. Theism vs. atheism? Pshaw. Red Sox vs. Yankees is more interesting. Yes, corporate monopolies are ruining the fun for a lot of people who never had any say in whether capitalism would be THE system for the U.S.A., but that doesn’t mean that you can’t have any fun. Life is as beautiful as you want it to be, or as horrible as you want. You just have to remember that the stuff that fills your head was put there by another batch of humans that also didn’t know their asses from their elbows. To identify so strongly with what you believe is what causes people to kill each other. And as much as people talk about not wanting that, it doesn’t seem to have stopped war or terrorism or name-calling, or even slowed it down any. Kurt was mentioning Jesus to point out the hypocrisy of this mostly Christian nation advocating very non-Christian doctrine. Anybody that doesn’t see that is simply not paying attention. You don’t even need to know that much about the guy.
My advice to all that read these posts - stop and smell the roses! Adieu!
Posted by etorrey on Aug 12, 2004 at 9:07 AM
Some interesting ideas have been put forth here.
I agree completely; dismissing an argument due to only mechanical errors such as incorrect spelling and word choice is rather ludicrous. Although I may have gone slightly overboard, my intentions in pointing out technical errors was to show that we all make plenty of errors. After all, this is a post board, not a professional paper. My entire point was that lingering on such mistakes is assinine and completely opposite progress, although after reading the prior posts I feel a bit sheepish. It is quite easy to let a bruised ego get in the way of common sense.
As fa as sitting back and smelling the roses - I couldn’t agree more. I won’t go into great detail, but I do my best to enjoy and appreciate the smaller things in life for what they are. However, I could not, in good conscience, merely sit back for the rest of my life and ignore great injustices I see all around me, injustices that cause others less fortunate to be unable to smell the roses themselves. I’m sure that even the most wretched existence provides short periods of personal reflection and satisfaction for nothing more than being alive. Spending the other 80 or 90 percent of your life in absolute misery, though, is a terrible thing to accept. This is why I devote much of my time to attempting to find something better, something that can help everything. This may be a fairy-tale goal, but I really don’t have anything better to do - get a job as a music producer, plant a garden, build a model boat in a bottle, it all is equally useless. In my view, and I may be wrong, we’re here for a while, then we go away. Writing a poem, playing a video game, or going to church all seem to be equally pointless in that they will all eventually come to nothing. It is this reasoning that has led me to my present conclusion:
Life is short, hard, and often a big let-down, as well as being utterly pointless in the long-run.
I don’t like seeing people suffer, or even knowing that they are.
Therefore, while trying to enjoy my own life, I will also dedicate it to trying to find ways to improve others’ (as well as my own).
This isn’t some kind of selfless act - actually, it’s compltely selfish. By helping others, I get a sense of satisfaction, knowing that I “made a difference,” whatever that means.
I would like to hear any reactions to these ideas.
Posted by HanktheHobo on Aug 12, 2004 at 1:52 PM
It’s interesting that the internet can become such a bitter place, where people say things to each other that would never be said face-to-face.
Anyway. People have resented America’s actions in the world before GWB’s presidency, but by an large most people were glad that the USA won the Cold War, not the Soviet Union (and by and large, still are). However, GWB’s administration have shown zero interest in foreign opinion, and have incurred a powerless sense of anger towards the current US government. Sure, France, Germany and Russia’s protestation of the Iraq war smacked of diplomatic wrangling, too, possibly due to alleged business contacts with the Hussein government. Yet the war was fought without a clear exit strategy and on faulty reasoning. (Al-Quaeda in Iraq? America has had more links with Bin Laden than Iraq, since Bin Laden worked for the CIA in Afghanistan before he blew things up for a living. WMDs? Nope.) There are positive things to say for the war (Hussein was pretty evil), but by and large the US military and administration seem to have entered the war prematurely and without a clear strategy. And now they’re backed into the corner of bombing a holy city, which will no doubt simply alienate them further from the Iraqi people. Maybe this was unavoidable (aside from not going to war, of course), but it’s a mess nonetheless.
I confess I probably know less about American domestic policy than the Americans here. Yet it seems odd that someone you would support as a President would turn a large surplus into a crippling debt, losing valuable public services as he goes. I guess, coming from a nation with a full welfare state, that Americans view public services differently, but even so, it seems wrong that the world’s most advanced nation has such poor health coverage, despite probably excellent facilities for those that do have it. Maybe that’s better than a service that people keep rubbishing but is free at the point of use; who knows?
A way out of the problems Bush is in? My own personal opinion: stop the tax cuts to the rich. They haven’t worked. Rebuild the economy (natch). Make a reasonable stab at returning order to Iraq, then leave, or replace the forces there with a more representative body, if the UN will play ball. Give the inmates of Guantanamo Bay trials ASAP; it’s doing America no good to have such a shady institution keeping foreign nationals in conditions that are billed to be atricious and which reporters haven’t been able to verify. Do something about Global Warming, etc; you’ll have to sooner or later, and the world will like you better for it if you start now. Plus, the Middle East won’t be so important if you don’t need their oil as much.
In long term, one lesson Britain has learnt is that you have to be very, very careful when using military force in other countries. Despite lofty ideals, most places you occupy will probably dislike you, and attempts to take advantage economically will cripple nations. I’m not saying that America has an empire anything as bad as Britain’s one, but it’s a lesson worth learning. Things like trying to view the inhabitants of the nation you’re in as people to be helped back on their feet as opposed to potential terrorists to a man help, difficult though it may be to patrol a street which could hide a militiaman carrying an RPG or rifle. It’s hard pleasing everyone when you’re the world’s only superpower, but GWB doesn’t seem to be trying to please anyone. As a Briton, I’m not particularly patriotic, and although support for our troops is taken as granted, it doesn’t extend into supporting our military ventures blindly, as I’ve seen some people do. The amount of criticism of our Prime Minister for partaking in the war with flawed reasons suggests that as a nation, we’re fairly critical of our actions in the world if they are perceived to be negative.
So it’s not all doom and gloom as you might read into Vonnegut’s writing, though granted, humans will probably wage wars, etc, for some time yet, but America is getting dangerously close to what Britain was 100 or 200 years ago, and it’s worth stepping back and looking at the direction you’re going in before embarking on a foreign policy such as GWB’s.
I hope you don’t mind me withholding my e-mail, but I tend to prefer not to plaster it about the net; it’s already clogging up with spam.
Posted by Sam on Aug 12, 2004 at 4:42 PM
“As the Dalai Lama has said, if you are going to be selfish, at least be wisely selfish. What he means by this peculiar-sounding advice is that in a way bodhicitta is like a huge selfish attitude: when you dedicate yourself to others with loving-kindness, you get back far more happiness than you could experience otherwise.”
—Introduction to Tantra, A Vision of Totality by Lama Yeshe
“Wisely” was italicized, but I can’t reproduce that here. Anyway, It looks like you’re onto something.
I’m sorry for being insensitive. I forget not everyone is as thick-skinned as I am. As a token of my sincerity, I hereby proclaim to be mrandmrsjohnqsmith no more. From now on, I am Mr. Fruitcakes.
Posted by mrandmrsjohnqsmith on Aug 12, 2004 at 6:12 PM
I like most of us ( if I may speak for some) are truly frustrated with life. When I was young life was great even if my childhood was below average. But when you are young, life’s worries and problems exist in another universe and boy what happened to that feeling.
In an earlier post it was mentioned that all should be allowed to speak their mind - I could not agree more. What really gets to me though, is when people start talking about religion or more specifically the Christian faith. Why can we not leave this out of the equation. Do we need to mention who we believe in as proof of our worth? Are we so insecure that we need to flash our badge of faith to strike fear into the hearts of infidels. Do we imagine our gods to be so insecure that they need personal marketing teams. We live on this planet and not the gods. Do I believe in any form of god. I do not know how to answer that question. I do know that what resides in my heart is a beautiful thing.
As another person mentioned earlier, we are so full of the misguided crap given to us from the folks who came before us. What chance do we stand of seeing clearly the way ahead. Most of us will spend the best part of our lives just trying to free ourselves from misguided truths, notions and things our parents told us in good faith, but are just simply wrong. How many will succeed. How many of us will succeed in not passing the same crap onto our kids. Speak about a vicious circle.
But to get back to that beautiful thing that is in our hearts, it has the ability to do immeasurable good. It has the power to change this world and the universe. Believe it. Its that simple. If it is God, Yahweh, Allah or Buddha who cares. Its there no matter what you want to call it.
Unfortunately the beauty that resides there is also the reason why we are stuck with the horror all around us. We are good and we need to do just that or else, well we know what else. Because we do not make use of this we are poisoning ourselves or slowly committing suicide. The saddest thing in this world is when the spirit gets knocked out of us. No more dreams just the same routine everyday. Drink another beer,
watch the TV. When will that bitch bring me my food. When will that pig die. And the little boys and girls if they are young hide the misery of their parents life’s deep inside hoping it will go away and so on.
“You might be finished with your past, but your past is not always finished with you” as the saying goes.
So the big question is, how do we correct all that we have done wrong to each other, the animals and our planet.
- Feel that beauty in your heart - Religion is between you and your God.
- We are all the same and if one of us is not free, none of us are free - Forget patriotism its over rated.
and so on. Thank you Mr.. Vonnegut. I hope your mighty sword strikes the fear of Dwayne’s bad chemicals into the beauty less hearts.
I apologise if I have offended anybody. This is not a pissing contest or a competition to see who’s better at the play of words. As Hank has said, its all pretty useless how you spend your day unless it is to help others in some way.
Posted by Watson on Aug 13, 2004 at 2:51 AM
“almost anybody can learn to think
or believe
or know,
but not a single human being
can be taught to feel.
why?
because whenever you think
or you believe
or you know,
you are a lot of other people:
but the moment you feel
you are nobody but yourself.
to be nobody but yourself-
in a world which is doing its best
night and day
to make you everybody else-
means to fight the hardest battle
which any human being can fight:
and never stop fighting.”
e.e. cummings
Posted by No Name on Aug 13, 2004 at 7:43 AM
Robert Anton Wilson said in a book that human beings are primates who cannot possibly conceive that anything could ever operate correctly without an Alpha Male, hence we dreamt up a flock of omnipotent deities.
I think we dreamt them up to justify things like coincidence, to help ourselves sleep at night when we commit grievous acts for which there are no reasonable/logical justifications, and the most horrendous of all situations, the suspension of skepticism, logic, and rationality.
Oh, and your everyday “2+2=5 because I believe in deities” claptrap.
The first Vonnegut book I have ever read was _Cat’s Cradle_ and I still get the most ominous of feelings when I think of what our politicians would do if/when given the type of power afforded to them with such a weapon as Ice-Nine.
Posted by privileged on Aug 13, 2004 at 7:03 PM
Hey Mr. V
My name is Ethan and I admire you a lot. Honestly, I have only read one of your books (Slaughterhouse 5), and it was purty darn awesome. Cat’s Cradle is next on my list either for Christmas break or until after I get done with some Gandhi.
Anyway, although you yourself seem to have little hope, you inspire me. I plan on spending my life pushing some rocks that have not shown any indication of moving throughout all of human existence until I die. Not too fun but I believe it to be my path.
Thank you for your writing.
Posted by Ethan on Aug 14, 2004 at 11:56 PM
“What really gets to me though, is when people start talking about religion or more specifically the Christian faith. Why can we not leave this out of the equation. Do we need to mention who we believe in as proof of our worth? Are we so insecure that we need to flash our badge of faith to strike fear into the hearts of infidels. Do we imagine our gods to be so insecure that they need personal marketing teams.”
A little reminder. The reason you are reading this, and perhaps posting here, is because you clicked on a little link titled “discuss this topic.” The “topic” is a piece which mentions Jesus and Christianity quite frequently in its context. It’s irrational to ask everyone to leave it out of the equation. I respectfully submit that you may be in the wrong thread.
I read back through this thread to find the instances in which people flashed their badges of faith to strike fear into the hearts of infidels, because I couldn’t remember seeing any. Here’s the best I could come up with, in chronological order:
“Jesus was the first libertarian…”
Not exactly a fearsome statement, aside from the fact that the Libertarian Party seems poised to leap into the “third party” gap that’s forming due to The People’s lack of interest in the two ruling parties. Beware the Libertarian party. They want to do away with pollution control. Apparently, environmentally conscious regulation hinders one’s “freedom” to pollute our environment. Supposedly “the free market” will do all of our regulating for us, but if it’s cheaper to dump toxic waste into everyone’s water supply than to dispose of it properly, the polluters win in a free market. When you mix your baby’s formula with that water, it becomes clear that environmental laws are like murder laws. They’re there for a good reason.
But I digress. Next.
“The Romans, the Pharisees; they were the kingdom of man. WE are the kingdom of God.”
This statement is probably the prime suspect in the case of the fearsome badge flashing, and yet it is only so by one interpretation because the author leaves us guessing as to who WE is. (Who AM us, anyway?) At first I thought maybe We meant “all of us humans,” but later Christianity is mentioned in the post, so one could infer that WE = Christians. If so, then that’s pretty exlusive and derogatory. The “Romans and Pharisees” bit makes me think the author is coming from a specifically Bible story point of view.
“The most progressive of all the Jews of Palestine were the Pharisees, who found the solution of the Essenes too elitist. In the New Testament, the Parisees are depicted as whited sepulcres and blatant hypocrites. This is due to distortions of first-century polemic. The Pharisees were passionately spiritual Jews. ...They cultivated a sense of God’s presence in the smallest detail of daily life.
...The Gospels often show Jesus arguing with the Pharisees, but the discussion is either amicable or may reflect a disagreement with the more rigorous school of Shammai.”
from A History of God by Karen Armstrong
And as long as I’m going to the trouble to do this,
“Do you honestly believe that these people do not suffer and more so physically than Jesus? We will go to the cinema and be devastated by the Passion of Christ, but we do not even blink an eye or take a moment to consider the suffering which is all around us now at this very moment and not over 2000 years ago.”
Watson, what you might not understand is that it wasn’t Jesus’ “physical suffering” that “devastated” people. It’s who Jesus is to them. Even Vonnegut refers to him as “that greatest and most humane of human beings.” According to many of these people’s faiths, Jesus is more even than that. He is their god, and to many of them he is the son of their God, offered up as a sacrificial lamb, a gift to redeem the sinners of the world. They feel directly affected by this particular slaying, because they believe it was done for the purpose of washing their sins away and saving their souls from eternal damnation, though they feel they are not worthy of such a gift. Perhaps that gives you some insight into why those people weep.
Posted by Mister Fruitcakes on Aug 15, 2004 at 12:36 PM
But, sadly, as one poster so eloquently put it, “...for all the good that Jesus Christ tried to convey, Christianity has been his unfortunate legacy.”
Too true. The Inquisition, the Crusades, the witch hunts, Oral Roberts…
The Christian Church has had it’s moments, though. The American Civil Rights movement, for example. Most of the civil rights leaders, from Dr. King to Mrs. Fannie Lou Hamer not only were practicing Christians, but made their faith a cornerstone of their efforts. Their faith was where they gathered strength from, their God was what gave them the courage to stand when they faced attack dogs, armed state troopers with guns and clubs, fire departments that would use their life-saving hoses as weapons, and the deep south jail cells, eviction, joblessness, and lynch mobs they knew would be waiting for them when they returned home.
Got carried away, there.
But for those who wish to keep it scientific, matter is never created nor destroyed. Energy is never created nor destroyed, only changed. That means that every molecule, every atom in your body, your brains and your toe jam, have always existed throughout eternity, and always will exist. Personally I often find the idea of simply returning to dirt at death, that’s the end of it, to be pretty comforting. Some think it’s scary, I do too, sometimes, the idea of having my light switched out forever, my inability to fathom such a thing, bla bla. It actually sounds pretty nice, though. Painless, anyway. An end to suffering. In Buddha’s first sermon he laid dowm the concept that life is suffering. No, what’s really scary is the alternative to a finite death. What if there really IS an afterlife?
But getting back to science…
A Physicist named DeBroglie gave us his contribution, a concept he dubbed the wave-particle duality. This one really flipped my wig. When I was growing up, our science classes taught us about atoms. We learned about a nucleus composed of a number of protons and neutrons being orbited by a number of electrons; those numbers had something to do with what kind of element the atom was or was a part of. The illustrations looked like little solar systems. The particles were usually depicted in the illustrations as little pink blue and green balls, and the idea we all got was that they were like tiny grains of matter, like microscopic sand or something.
What DeBroglie told us was that these particles were actually WAVES. The “building blocks” of all that we know are miniscule vibrations in space. These vibrations, in combination with each other, make up the complex world we exist in, from the skin we slough off to the earth we stand on to the sun we orbit. It kind of destabilizes one’s concept of one’s self. Just as a wave at a certain frequency and wavelength is detected by the apparatus tuned for it, our ears, is perceived as sound, and a vibration at a certain frequency and wavelength is detectible by our eyes and called light, and many more vibrations we cannot detect at all, vibrations at certain frequencies and wavelengths combine to form complex structure which we experience as matter. That makes me feel pretty good. It allows me to imagine the entire universe as a supreme symphony, of which I am a part, a movement, an arrangement of notes. It also reminds me of things people said, like the Reiki practitioners who spoke of “tuning” and achieving higher frequencies, and the acid heads and schizophrenics who spoke of hearing colors and seeing sound. It makes me think of Om, the breath of the world, and of IHIH, the first cause, like the first ripple in the surface of a calm water. The water itself? The disturbance that caused the ripple? The relationship between the two? All of the above, all THREE?
A Baha’i friend of mine once said to me, “Religion and science agree, people just haven’t discovered it yet.”
And I’ve been in front of the computer screen for way too long. Sorry for being so long winded. Keep up the good work.
Posted by Mister Fruitcakes on Aug 15, 2004 at 12:40 PM
...and I see plenty of typos and glaring grammatical errors in my post. Fire away, critics. I also failed to mention in referring to the Civil Rights movement that it was the churches that served as the headquarters, the gathering places, and the networks for the movement.
I really should go to bed now.
Posted by Mister Fruitcakes on Aug 15, 2004 at 12:50 PM
My wife Kathleen said this to me the other day:
“Truth is the fiction that sneaks up on you.”
Almost made it through another day.
Peace & Good Forklifts.
- Clancy
Posted by john clancy on Aug 15, 2004 at 3:57 PM
I would just like everyone to know that the Babylonian Empire stretched through modern day Iraq, Syria, Israel, Jordan, Eastern Turkey and Egypt, Western Iran and the top of the Arabian Peninsula. And if it’s true that ZERO originated in Babylon, than Mr. Vonnegut is indeed right, the Arabs, whether Muslim at that point in history or not, did indeed invent the sign for nothing. And just a side note, our numeric system (as in 1, 2, 3) is called the Hindu-Arabic Numeral System, and whether Arabs or Hindus wrote those numbers first, I think Mr. Vonnegut’s point is that the ancestors of the people now so maligned in Iraq made enormous contributions to our history, culture and lives. And that ain’t no bullshit.
Posted by La Justa AKA Justine on Aug 16, 2004 at 11:16 AM
I appologize for straying from the general topic:
Dear Mr. Vonnegut,
The Chinese did use gunpowder for primitive guns involving rocks and bamboo.
Posted by Mossman on Aug 18, 2004 at 6:14 PM
While this is not meant to compare you to Christ, Mr. Vonnegut: “Forgive these commentators, for they know not what they do.” You, at 81, another roaring golden lion near in age to my father, have seen more and probably forgotten more than I will ever know. Thank you for taking the time to use your eloquent voice and share it with everyone. In a word growing increasingly topsy-turvy, where the alleged “Leader of the Free World” uses shiny, happy language to mask initiatives with seemy, frightening underbellies, it’s quite refreshing to know not everyone has partaken of the Kool-Aid they offer.
Posted by Anne on Aug 19, 2004 at 5:02 PM
Vonnegut is a bitter man. He may be in pain from illness, his drinking habit, or simply a lack of love for himself and others. I do not know.
What I can say is this. To read and absorb Vonnegut’s writing is one more confirmation for the unfortunate that darkness is pervasive and persistent, which it is not.
If you are depressed. If you feel powerless. Talk with a therapist. Start simply, slowly. Get a checkup by a doctor. Work on making sure you can make ends meet, now and in the future. Then start thinking about your job. Do you enjoy it? If not, why. Can you change it? Probably yes, once you pick past all the self generated excuses. Are you close to your friends? Can you get in a fight with them, share your personal feelings, weaknesses, and still be friends? Then find a lover. Clean yourself up. Make yourself attractive. Read a book on the subject.
These are the valuable lessons I have learned in life, and they have severed me well. Very very well.
Good luck, and email me if you have a question.
-Taylor
Posted by Taylor Hayward on Aug 20, 2004 at 9:52 AM
If anything, Taylor, I’d say Vonnegut has a better grasp on his feelings than most at his. Most people at that age, speaking from having elderly parents, aunts, uncles and such, are angry, slow to change and blame everything on the younger generation.
Vonnegut Bitter? I don’t think so; more of a realist who wishes the future generations well but isn’t going to sugar-coat anything.
I’m of the belief myself, that kids today have it much rougher than I had it growing up. I didn’t have to worry about a classmate packing heat in revenge. There were no metal detectors and video games weren’t around yet to distract me from doing my homework. All you hear about today is the pressure put on today’s youth to succeed, goddammit! And that’s because college is so outrageously expensive, proportionately more so than even 10 years ago.
Are you of the opinion that people who take medicine for depression are weak? Should “pull themselves up by their bootstraps” whatever that means?
With 25 years of nuclear testing, preceeded by horrible pollution to our air, water and soil, it’s a wonder most people aren’t suffering from more things.
And I think you’re taking his writing much too seriously if you believe that. It’s just writing, humor and opinions by a great novelist. If you read more into it then you’re missing the best part—enjoyment.
I find his In These Times articles refreshing after putting up with a visit from my parents where they proceeded to tell me how horrible I am for being a member of the ACLU, for jumping on any little flaw in my life, for not writhing on the floor in absolute agony over every little problem I have and for ruining my neice’s wedding with their pettiness, complaints and childish behavior. THEY are supposed to be the aged, wise and mature ones? I love and respect them but not the attitudes I find so common among the aging.
May I be struck mute at that age if I wind up the same way.
Posted by Windex on Aug 20, 2004 at 10:21 AM
I’m a big proponent of psychoactive medications used to give people a chance to improve their lives.
I have read several of Vonnegut’s books. I have also seen him show up to a speech I attended late and drunk. I find the subject matter he speaks on, almost in totality, is negative. Not that what he says isn’t true, but why talk about only the negative? Bad things happen all the time. Good things happen all the time. What do we accomplish by blaming others, who we generally have no control over, when the person we do have the most control over is suffering/depressed/lonely/insecure/etc. needlessly? Surely there is some facet of your life that could improve the length and quality of your time here. This is certainly true of me. And this is where I focus my efforts. Consequently my interactions with most people I meet tend to be more meaningful, enjoyable, and generally more valuable.
-Taylor
Posted by Taylor Hayward on Aug 20, 2004 at 11:01 AM
People like you, fortunately, aren’t fit to wipe Vonnegut’s boots, let alone respond to his articulate messages. Apparently, just because he sees and is willing to point out the fact our Emperor has no clothes on, and not all of us have taken the happy right-wing Stepford outlook, you’re advocating medication. Since one of the Bushites said the same thing about people without jobs, I’ll go out on a limb and say you’re probably a staunch Repub example of “compassionate” conservative. Something in the smarmy, judgmental tone just points to it. You know, it’s easy for people who don’t think very deeply to be happy about everything; it’s the blessing of a superficial outlook that tosses platitudes out as a means to solve problems. So much easier than really thinking, for those who are devoid of the ability. Did you get your “insights” from Cosmopolitan or Redbook this week? They smack of simplicity, in the worst possible sense.
Posted by Anne on Aug 20, 2004 at 3:44 PM
Just a few things I wanted to throw into the pot here:
1. “Vote for none of the above!” -Richard Pryor as Monty Brewster in Brewster’s Millions
2. Cogito Ergo Sum ( Latin for I think therfore I am) - Descarte
This is the only truth in our world of bent straws and evil geniuses, so follow it.
3. And lastly, after reading all your posts, yes I have no life, I work like a dog to pay for an 8.5 x 11 piece of sheepskin that says I’m smart, I have only one question… If you think something’s wrong with your world, or this world for that matter, what the hell are you gonna do about it?
Hint: Bitching only makes it worse…
To Kurt Vonnegut: Harrison Bergeron( read it when I was 10, brilliant)
Slaughter House 5, Awesome! It was tough to understand the first time through, but good enough to read again.
Posted by Stu on Aug 20, 2004 at 6:06 PM
This is going to seem weird coming from the #?!+ who posted some pretty shrill stuff a while back. But we’ve already gotten into one vitriolic ad hom snarl, and I’m ashamed to say I helped perpetuate and drastically accelerate it. I do feel that none of us is above a good scolding now and then, especially if it’s constructive. We could all stand to be slapped back into our places from time to time. But it’s best if the one doing the slapping can refrain from getting too worked up and going overboard. It makes for an entertaining display of fireworks, but there is a severe risk of the original point getting drowned out, and of a muck forming in which only confusion and resentment thrives. As it was I had my fiery retort all ready to spew when LX came along and took it to another level, and I knew I had to let it go. It was descending into vanity.
The words of a wise man’s mouth are gracious, but the lips of a fool shall swallow him up. Ecclesiastes 10:12
(deal with it, bible haters)
So, the catastrophe of this thread descending into mindless egotistical mudslinging, so typical of discussion boards, was averted, the bad feelings routed. Cheers to LX. (Who was that masked poster? Sure cleaned up this thread!)
So I humbly appeal to the individual who declares which of his/her fellow lunatics are and aren’t fit to wipe Vonnegut’s boots, let alone respond to his articulate messages. Take it from a fruitcake. I entreat said crackpot to understand what hangs in the balance and to refrain from ad hom personal attacks, such as calling his/her fellow headcases staunch Repub conservatives. Maybe the post seemed a little shallow, but don’t you think “Repub” was a little harsh? Next thing you know, it’s knee-jerk liberal commie this and facist pig in a blanket that, and enemy of the people and take ten and burn baby burn and tear him for his bad verses.
And in the aftermath, rubbing the tear gas out of our eyes and nursing our rubber bullet wounds, counting those no longer among us, maybe we try to remember what we were debating before it descended into self-serving vanity.
But Mister Fruitcakes, you hypocrite, how can you sit there and say that, and call us all crazy at the same time?
Answer: Because you’re all off your rockers. It takes one to know one. The truth hurts. Slapping someone with the truth is different from hurling insults. The last thing I want to do is insult anyone. Personally I find belittling someone’s faith to be far more insulting than calling them a nutty fruitcake, but that’s just me. Out to lunch, rubber room ready, neurotic on good days, psychotic on not-so-good days, you’ll admit it to yourseld one of these dum-de-dumb days. The sooner everyone comes clean with themselves and grows up enough to admit that they have no clue what the $#%* is going on, the sooner paradise will appear, just as though it had been waiting, all around us, all along.
No man has a wholly undiseased mind…in one way or another all men are mad.
-Twain, “The Memorable Assassination”
“When we remember we are all mad, the mysteries of life disappear and life stands explained.”
-Twain again, Notebook
Posted by Mister Fruitcakes on Aug 21, 2004 at 8:31 AM
True scientists will admit they don’t have much more than a clue, the same can be said of true spiritual seekers. It’s only non-scientists who misunderstand and fall under an illusion that nearly everything has been figured out, like a frontier that’s steadily closing. The truth is that, thus far, it just keeps going. That’s what’s so compelling about it. With every question that gets answered, a multitude of new questions arise. With every discovery comes the realization that there’s a whole lot more that we don’t know than what we previously thought we knew we didn’t know. Big just keeps getting bigger, and small just keeps getting smaller. The universe is finite with a center? Who’s to say our “big bang” (misnomer) isn’t but one of many such occurences, spreading from their centers like the ripples formed by raindrops on a pond? (if you’ll pardon the two-dimensional metaphor) And now scientists are close to proving the existence of “new” subatomic particles that may rearrange our way of understanding the miniscule end of the spectrum of infinity, if you’ll pardon another misuse. Our understanding of the magnitude of the question of life, the universe, and everything in it seems only to be limited by the size and power of our telescopes and microscopes, simplistically and metaphorically speaking, that is.
Well, it looks like our banter hasn’t scared Mr. Vonnegut off. He’s put up a new article. You wonder if he’s read any of this?
Posted by Mister Fruitcakes on Aug 21, 2004 at 8:33 AM
Whoah! I just hopped over to the discussion board for the other Vonnegut entry. It’s full of exactly what we managed to avoid over here. Check it out, it’s like night and day. When you see pages and pages of “You’re an idiot,” “No, you are,” “I know you are but what am I,” “He’s stupid,” etc. etc., the “Cold Turkey” discussion board seems like a miracle. They even have a neo-nazi over there, and he’s the one of the most eloquent of the whole bickering bunch! I throw myself on my face and pledge to control my passions and uphold the integrity of this thread. I’m passionate; I let my passions get the better of me. I think crapping on someone’s faith is rude as hell. That’s because I’ve been around the world a bit. I know better than to just shit on someone’s faith. For the sake of not contributing to a spiraling out of control of what is, well, a more thoughtful thread than what’s going on in the “I Love You, Madam Librarian” pool, I will try to voice my righteous indignation in the most dignified manner my powers of self-control can allow.
Posted by Mister Fruitcakes on Aug 22, 2004 at 5:14 AM
“I did smoke a joint of marijuana one time with Jerry Garcia and the Grateful Dead, just to be sociable. It didn’t seem to do anything to me, one way or the other, so I never did it again.”
To Mister Vonnegut, if you’re reading this:
It is well known among marijuana enthusiasts that most people don’t get high the first time. Personally, I didn’t feel anything until the third time, bringing about the old “third time’s a charm” uh, thing. A friend of mine claims it took him seventeen tries. SEVENTEEN?! He says he was determined. He’s a brilliant fellow, a painter. Seventeenth time was the “charm” for him. Now he’s a believer. With today’s advancements in cultivation techniques and so forth, and if you’re interested, it might be worth your while to try again and sample a little of what modern horticulture has to offer. I promise, it’s harmless. No one in human history has ever died from smoking marijuana. Smoking is of course not the best thing to do for your lungs, but I’m talking to a tobacco man here. I highly reccomend scoring some quality stuff. Don’t waste your time and breath on something that was maybe decent once, grown in Mexico, smashed into what potheads call a “brick” (that’s where the vegetative matter has been conpressed into a dense block for smuggling, often soaked in diesel or some other crap during its illegal journey across borders) and sold on the cheap containing God-knows-what. Surely a man of your stature can get connected with what the young’uns affectionately refer to as “kind.” If it’s fluffy, sparkly and pretty like a flower, like that stuff you might see in a High Times centerfold, you’re on the right track. If it looks like what happens to raked autumn leaves after a thunderstorm, it’s hardly worth the effort.
If you feel up to the experiment, please let us all know what you think. Or don’t. It’s your experience. I reccomend a comfortable setting, surrounded by stuff that inspires you. Most reccomend the presence of beloved music and art. They say it’s all about atmosphere. I couldn’t agree more.
Posted by Mister Fruitcakes on Aug 22, 2004 at 5:48 AM
Why am I reaching for Twain to justify calling everyone crazy? My justification is right here:
What does “A.D.” signify? That commemorates an inmate of this lunatic asylum we call Earth who was nailed to a wooden cross by a bunch of other inmates.
Who can honestly say Nurse Rached wasn’t in need of a little medication her damn self?
This lunatic asylum we call Earth. Are you an Earthling?
A citizen of planet Earth.
Posted by Mister Fruitcakes on Aug 22, 2004 at 5:52 AM
Fruitcake,
I was under the impression that this was a discussion area. People throw ideas out there and generally get some feedback. You however enjoy going at it yourself. Do you ever listen? or do you enjoy “talking” the hind legs of a donkey?
There is enough people out there who want to say something, so give it a break.
Posted by Nobody on Aug 23, 2004 at 1:15 AM
By all means, don’t let me stop you. What was it you wanted to say?
Posted by Mister Fruitcakes on Aug 23, 2004 at 4:59 AM
Taylor,
I’m ashamed of myself for making comments for someone I’ve never seen speak before, as you have. Also, I feel a little disappointed that KV showed up drunk, even though I love getting loaded once in awhile, but can’t since the epilepsy—and I’m German and Irish to boot, so I’m doubly screwed.
You’ve read his bookss AND seen him speak in person and I took a “higher moral ground” on you when in fact, I was the hypocrite.
I still love Vonnegut’s work and wish him well and a continued good fight.
Thanks for being patient and handling my comments with courtesy.
-Windex
Posted by Windex on Aug 23, 2004 at 6:56 AM
Just to clear the air, Kurt Vonnegut is not an alcoholic, for as much as some of you may want to believe he is. Second, he does not suffer from depression. He’s actually quite a funny, gregarious octogenarian. I hope to be that cool when I’m 50. Third, I’ve seen him speak in public, and he was neither negative nor drunk. Fourth, I can say all this with this proud air of authority because I know him personally. Let’s keep the personal attacks to a minimum, they’re obviously unfounded and pointless. And to Windex: Never lose faith in a person because of hearsay.
Rock on you threadsters.
Posted by La Justa on Aug 23, 2004 at 10:10 AM
Great op/ed by Vonnegut. Just came across it.
Hey in case anyone is still wondering, HanktheHobo owns you all. lol. Thanks Hank. Good to see somebody having fun feeding the trolls.
RE: to your last post Hank: There is no such thing as a selfless act. It’s like trying to pick yourself up off the ground by lifting up on your shoes. Simply impossible IMO.
Maybe a total accident that has a benevolent result could be considered a selfless _action_? I’d argue that a personal mishap (which results in an unintentional benefit to a 3rd party) qualifies as a selfless _action_ but not an _act_.
These comments should be published wherever the original article is published. We’re all drunk on the power of anonymous posting. :]
Posted by Fractal Soup on Aug 26, 2004 at 5:36 AM
Its not oil that we’re hooked on. There are lots of technical options to oil.
No, what we’re hooked on is the inner-chimpanzee.
Let me explain.
Part of the reason—maybe the main reason—it is so painful being a human is that we’re technological creatures. Indeed it is our technology more than our ability to speak to each other that most distinguishes us from other animals. Human heritage is a huge technological fix progressing from one stage to the next.
Each stage of technical advance does two contradictory things: 1) It takes us a little further from where we can afford to indulge our inner chimp. 2) It provides the illusion that we have turned the universe into a subSaharan Africa habitat complete with climate control and abundant food.
It is the second thing, the illusion that the universe has been tamed into being a subSaharan habitat, that we’re hooked on.
We remember what it was like to be chimps back home. It was much nicer then even though we’d get in nasty fights and be eaten by lions. All our technology is nothing more than a simulation of chimp habitat. We hope to have everything under enough control that we can forget about all this machinery around us and just do chimp things again.
Things don’t work that way.
Posted by James Bowery on Aug 27, 2004 at 12:10 PM
At first I´d like to apologize my language (I´m from Finland [You know the place next to the ex-Soviet Union] and english is my fourth language). I don´t have much to comment about that text, expect it´s so true. We Europeans often wonder, why you Yankees doesn´t understand what you are doing. Or why you can´t admit how wrong you have been. Sure there are many who does, but it doesn´t seem like it in where we stand (Europeans).
Well, we´ll see in march if you have learned anything… If Bush gets elected, tou´re in deep shit. Your reputation as a model for a free and great country is already almost gone in other countries. But you might have a chance to save it. Bush ain´t the answer. I don´t say that Kerry is, but he can´t be worse.
Finally, keep on going mr. Vonnegut, I ave you. It´s a shame that your whole production isn´t translated on to finnish.
Gracefully yours, Tommi Kotikangas, Finland
Posted by Tommi Kotikangas on Aug 30, 2004 at 9:10 AM
hi,..i liked to read about cold turkey,..but i had need 1 thing. that was What’s the define of the cold turkey,..could you please send me defination of the cold turkey please
thank you,..
Undram
Posted by Undraa on Aug 30, 2004 at 5:56 PM
writing of this sort is by and large a thankless job, so i’m saying: thank you, Mr. Vonnegut. please don’t quit.
Posted by superturkle on Aug 30, 2004 at 8:27 PM
Undram,
“Cold turkey” is an expression. We use it when a drug addict tries to stop doing drugs. Vonnegut was talking about our addiction to fossil fuel. If the drug addict stops completely one day, and not gradually, we say he/she “quit cold turkey.” For example, Richard smokes tobacco. He smokes twenty cigarretes a day, and he wants to quit. If he decreases the amount of tobacco gradually, to 15 a day, then 10 a day, then 7, and so on, he is not quitting cold turkey. If he smokes 20 cigarrettes every day, then one day he smokes ZERO cigarrettes, and then never smokes again, he has quit COLD TURKEY. Understand?
Hey, there’s that zero again. It really IS incorrigible!
(Maybe I shouldn’t encourage it.)
Posted by Mister Fruitcakes on Aug 31, 2004 at 6:47 AM
I am so happy to have come across this article and thread. I got here by way of a mention in Mother Earth magazine of Kurt Vonnegut’s article “Cold Turkey”. Recently, I reread Vonnegut’s “Bluebeard” coincidentally. I like to reread some of my favorite authors or novels over the years to see how my insights and perceptions have changed or remain the same. I collected Vonnegut’s novels in my very late teens and early 20’s (late 80’s). I found his writing immediately draw me in again, I was never bored. I am glad to see that Kurt Vonnegut is still a humanist and still has a fresh way with words. His time- and memory - traveling characters influenced and changed my linear thinking at the time. His humor mixed with human empathy resonated with me.
I find all these posts and arguments interesting. I intend to read more of his articles in these archives, but i had to share some philosophical thoughts that I have recently pondered. I had them all typed out (which is a feat because I suk at typing) when it all disappeared (boohoo) so I am determined to say it again, though now it is a little briefer and I will make points in two entries.
I just finished reading “On Film” by Stephen Mulhall (published by Routledge 2002, part of “Thinking In Action” philosophy series) which examines the 4 “Alien” movies and a few others by the various directors. This book opened my mind to ideas expressed that I didn’t really consider when I watched them. These are humanist themes so I think they relate philosophically. I would just like to share some insightful quotes by this brilliant thinker, quotes that say it better than I could ever dream of trying to convey it in writing. Since “Blade Runner” was just voted a sci-fi favorite among scientists here a re a few quotes regarding that film.
p.35 “It follows that the humanity of the replicants is in the hands of their fellows; their accession to human status involves their being acknowledged as human by others, and if their humanity is denied, it withers.”
p.36 (Ridley) “Scott invites us to acknowledge that a refusal to acknowledge another’s humanity constitutes a denial of the humanity in oneself.”
p.39 ...“mortal finitude is not reducible to the fact of our finite lifespan; it is rather constituted by the fact that every moment of human life is necessarily shadowed by the possiblity of its own non-existence.”
The Heideggerian roots:
p.40 ...“to live one’s life authentically is to let every moment burn brightly whilst (perhaps by) still acknowledging that each such moment shall pass.”
p.43 “he” [Roy Baty] “sees that, since mortality is as internal to human existence as embodiment, genuine humanity turns on finding the right relation to it.”
Posted by daydreamer on Aug 31, 2004 at 2:27 PM
Now I want to share a long passage from the same book )“On Film” by Stephan Mulhall from chapter one, “Kane’s Son, Cain’s Daughter” that so eloquently encapsulates the overriding themes of “Alien”:
pp31, 32
“Ripley’s unremitting drive to preserve her integrity is thus, in essence, an expression of her sense of alienation from life, nature and the cosmos, and from everything in herself that participates in—that binds her ineluctably to—that which she hates so purely. For after all, does she not in the end succeed in imposing her will upon Ash,” [the robotic science officer]“Mother” [the spaceship]“and the alien itself? Is not her final victory over the monster in the ‘Narcissus’ (the ‘Nostromo’‘s shuttle), her success in creating a space from which to give voice to the mayday message that she speaks over the film’s concluding frames, achieved by reshaping her environment (making it a vacuum)and herself (suiting up) so that she might bury a harpoon in the heart of her opponent and in the heart of the heartless cosmos into which her weapon dispatches it? What better exemplification of the masculine will-to-power fo which her thoughts, deeds and underlying psychology declare such detestation (as if the alien she confronts in the ‘Narcissus’ is a reflection of herself)? (Seeing this beautifully choreographed assault, this seamless dovetailing of heart, mind and spirit in the service of vengeance, we might recall Ash’s description of the alien—immediately after it has burst from Kane’s chest—as ‘Kane’s son’. This is the film’s most explicit reference to the alien’s unmanning capacity to make human males pregnant; but its aural reference to the Bible’s name for the first human murderer further implies that the monster’s death-dealing rapacity is not essentially alien to humanity, but rather at work in the first human family, and never eradicated from the human family as such thereafter. If, then, Ripley is a sister under the skin to Kane’s son, she is Cain’s daughter—offspring not of God’s beloved Abel but of his wrathful brother, the first violator of human solidarity, condemned by God to be a fugitive and vagabond on the earth, essentially not at home in the universe He created.) But if what Ripley hates is what saves her from what she hates (if it is the pure flame of the life in her that overcomes its own monstrous, externalized incarnation), must she end by hating herself, by overcoming that which she hates in herself, or by overcoming her hatred?”
Wow. I think this passage works on so many levels.
Posted by daydreamer on Aug 31, 2004 at 2:56 PM
Do you suppose we are all just talking to ourselves?
Does anyone really have the attention span to read much of this—let alone REALLY listen?
When was that last time you had a unique opinion that was really listened to—by someone other than a close friend or stratigic cohort?
When was the last time you listened to someone with a differing view-point, and really heard what their life was expressing through them to the world?
Mr. V has the gift of being heard—through work and “tallent” I guess it’s called—but unlike most in such position, he has something NEW to share. The freshness of his vision is in it’s simplicity—just what I’m talking about!—the ablity to accept information, to listen to the complexity of it all!
Through sharing differing views and experience, humanity takes part in the survival strategy that has gotten us this far…and is still our best hope for the challenges of…now.
But this process relies on listening, and the advancement of a group consiousness where EVERYTHING that neeeds to be said, gets said and is allowed to be part of the shared story.
Everything has already been done, every mistake has been tried to some extent already… the results are already all around us, it’s just that paying proper attention is a skill of the few—while the practice of involvement by the many to actively LISTEN has simply lapsed. This is the major humanistic failing of this age, around which the major global problems of the day go unchecked.
Posted by Colin Park on Aug 31, 2004 at 3:10 PM
<(’-’<) <(’-’)> (>’-’)>
the end?
But “seriously”... Thank you Mr. Vonnegut. If you’re ever in Chicago I’ll give you a tour of the alley next to my school. keke ^^
Posted by Nathan Peters on Sep 1, 2004 at 2:58 PM
Chicago alleys are cool!
Posted by Mr F on Sep 1, 2004 at 3:59 PM
Good Point Colin.
Everybody has something to say and often enough it is worth listening to. I guess we are all so horrified by what is happening around us, all we are doing is commenting, stating the obvious and not listening to potential solutions.
Posted by Watson on Sep 2, 2004 at 7:57 AM
Keep in mind, though, this is a message board. This is where we actually exhale something of what we’ve inhaled. HOPEfully we are doing more listening than speaking, as the old “two ears, one mouth” saying suggests. The sound of silence doesn’t translate too well into typed text.
One can usually tell, however, from typed text, how much listening, reading, paying attention, or comprehending the typist had done before opening up his/her/its digital mouth.
Posted by Mr F on Sep 2, 2004 at 5:24 PM
“The solution lies within the problem.”
-George Clinton, “Good Thoughts, Bad Thoughts”
Sometimes when a problem is being discussed, some people are prone to standing up and saying, “Why complain? Why don’t you DO something about it?”
However, there is a difference between stating and discussing a problem and mere complaining. Speaking about a problem is a way of analyzing the problem, which is a vital step in solving the problem. Therefore, talking about it IS doing something about it.
The problem we have been challenged with here, put forth by Mr. Vonnegut, is one that has been struggled with for millenia.
WHAT IS LIFE ALL ABOUT?
No small errand.
Posted by Mr F on Sep 2, 2004 at 5:44 PM
First Zero occurs in Mayan inscription. Its not clear if the Mayan theocracts were nice guys, seems they may have thrown heartless bodies down those steep steps. They ran out of something… firewood to make lime?... enthusiastic serfs?.. and revertd rather suddenly to a smaller population without temple-building.
When cheap oil runs out (2008 CE? 2012CE?) we can expect a similar crash. KV is correct to describe USA reliance on cheap fossils as an addiction
Posted by g bruno on Sep 2, 2004 at 7:15 PM
so many pepole with so much to say, if you want to know the truth,it will find you.
Posted by oliver moore on Sep 5, 2004 at 5:30 AM
Very astute, Mr Vonnegut. It must feel good not to disapoint people who have come to have such high expectations of you.
Posted by Elias Zwillenberg on Sep 5, 2004 at 8:29 AM
I always have to rememeber a stupid joke that I was told. The joke itself is short and I believe extremely reflective of the human condition.
The joke goes like this…
“Why does a dog lick is balls? Becuase he can.”
Why do humans do what they do so well. Inflicting pain and misery on others.
Because we can. We need no reason.
Posted by Watson on Sep 5, 2004 at 11:54 PM
Some of us are quite good at inflicting pleasure and bliss upon one another. It’s loads more fun.
Posted by Mr F on Sep 6, 2004 at 7:45 AM
I challenge Hank the Hobo to think about his statement that Islamic (or Arab) cultures have made many many contributions to culture and society (or something along those lines)... Truth be told, they’ve done little besides stealing the ideas (making them available to others - - at a price) of the cultures they’ve conquered and enslaved or forcefully converted (“OK, all youse wantin’ to convert to Islam move over here to the right, all youse who want to die move over there, to theleft…”) and begrudge anyone else any sort of humanity, comfort, or security within the Arab/Islamic sphere of influence (“Dar as Islam”). There’s no need to pat the Arab’Islamic culture on the back, they do it for themselves enough, or have their slaves do it for them. Of course there are millions upon millions living in these countries who’d rather do nothing than raise their families in peace and security, yet they allow the teachers and promoters of extremism in the Arab/Islamic world get away with too much (including their sons) because it is WHAT THE PROPHET SAID THEY SHOULD DO. Ask an Indian, an Armenian, a Coptic Egyptian, a black Sudanese what Arab/Islamic “culture” has contributed to the world, and find out the truth.
Posted by porzitsku on Sep 7, 2004 at 1:05 PM
I believe, I am the Hank A. Hobo you are referring to. My name is Justine, and I am neither Muslim, nor from an African or Asian country. And for as much as I love arguing with biggots who can’t stand the thought of anyone other than an American or Anglo Saxon making a positive contribution to history, I am writing merely to say that everyone, and I mean every group, regardless of color, ethnicity or religion, has at one point or another been both an aggressor or a victim.
The Germanic tribes fought their way all over Europe cutting heads and raping. The Scandinavians plundered and pillaged. The Romans dominated most of Europe and a lot of Africa. YES, I am talking about those super cool, democratic (although at times despotic), very civilized Romans. And you’ve got to hand it to those Arabs, they did a good job of conquest themselves. Of course, they were one of the most influencial and powerful of all of the ancient civilizations, and we can’t attribute all of that to luck. But as with all great civilizations, the periods of greatness must come to an end. Rome collapsed, the Germanic tribes settled on Germany, and the Scandinavians settled for the artic circle. And despite the poking and prodding of Christians, the Muslim empire only lost it’s stongholds in Southern Europe. But what am I doing giving you this long and winding history. I was making a point.
You talk all high and mighty about Arabs being this bestial force that is only capable of distruction and hate. But I say look inward. Look at the country you live in. European Americans drove the native people of this land almost to extinction, and for what? Land. Money. They stole land from Mexico, the Carribean and Guam. And for what? Land. Money. God helps those who help themselves, I guess. It seems like the only way these great civilizations know how to get anything is through death and destruction. The United States is the latest and greatest of these civilizations. It’s made strong by its people and its diversity. But as with all other civilizations, this one will fall too. And I hope that when it does, people won’t look down on us and say we only did wrong, that our culture isn’t worth the dirt on the soles of our shoes. I hope that people will realize that for all the good and bad in our long history we played a large part in making the world what it is. And I hope that at that point in time, people will be educated enough to recognize that fact.
Posted by La Justa on Sep 7, 2004 at 2:35 PM
Mr Vonnegut,
I am glad you are still alive.
I see Mr Bush is busy, busy, busy…
We need to talk. There’s something in my thermos flask you need to see.
Posted by Kobus on Sep 9, 2004 at 5:35 AM
Have you scene Fahrenheit 9/11?
If not, GO AND SEE IT!
Posted by F11 on Sep 13, 2004 at 12:02 AM
One correction - it has recently come to light that the 10th century Chinese did use gunpowder for more than fireworks or signal rockets - it didn’t take long for the familiar human behaviour of killing each other to manifest itself. There is no blameless or noble segment of human kind. The Arabs in the 1300’s invented the gun - using black powder to shoot arrows from iron-reinforced bamboo tubes.
Mr. Vonnegut’s poor impression of the state of humanity is simply an observation. He is correct - certainly there used to be the impression amongst WWII-era American soldiers that their government appreciated their sacrifice and that they would not be sent in harm’s way for nothing. This is clearly no longer the case.
It is notable that there is evidence of chimpanzee homicide - that chimps are capable of raiding and killing their own kind. This is not surprising since we share so much DNA.
I, at age 49, still have a modicum of hope that the ideals so many have died for in the cause of liberty, truth and justice for all may still be preserved in America. It begins with removal of the hippocrits currently in power. My hopes will either be dashed or supported come Nov 4th - unless Bush / Cheney / Rove stop the election.
Kudos to Kurt.
Posted by frank erickson on Sep 18, 2004 at 12:18 PM
At least he can pronounce strategy and spell absolute. Dubya spells it “Absolut” to this day, after his favorite vodka. Speaking of bullshitters…
Let us demand that those who wish to post the ten commandments follow them. Thou shall not kill, steal, covet. Thou shall honor thy father and thy mother. Good advice. But most of all, when we fail to live up to these lofty aspirations, let us “not use God’s name” as if he was telling us it was ok to lie/cheat/steal/kill/worship idols/covet. He most certainly did not tell us it was ok. Jesus said to forgive us because we’re idiots, but that’s hardly a blanket approval of war, greed, executions, and mispronouncing nucular.
Or having nucular weapons.
On a side note, in case K reads this drivel… In fate’s worse than death, you wrote a requiem that moved me, and discussed a one time only performance. Are there any recordings of this, anywhere? I have a carton of unfiltered pall malls in it for anyone who can locate it.
Posted by John on Sep 19, 2004 at 7:50 AM
Howdy,ya all
With the risk of being redundant,I would like to
stress the fact that Kurt Vonnegut ,and with him a large and merry bunch,have a somewhat “exotic"perception of the Arab-Muslim world.
Is it because the USA,(Blessed they are),have
a 0,5 percent “muslim population…
We have ,in France,a nice 12-14 percent muslim population.
I teach in suburbs with 50-70 percent proportion.
I would very much like for Mr Vonnegut to come and visit and live in these areas.
I love America,but it is sometimes becoming
an achievement in itself when you hear Mr Vonnegut angelic blabbering,or Mr Bush
calling for the entrance of Turkey in the EEC.
Both attitudes denote a total disinterest in the
fate of the Europeans,or is it total ignorance,or both?
The Arabs did -not- invent the numbers we use.The Indo Europeans did.As well as the zero. It appeared in 458 AD in an indian cosmology treaty.Defined in 628 by Brahmagupta as the result of a whole number substracted from itself.
It was not before the eight century that the zero,as well as the rest of the Indo Europeans numerals,were introduced at the court of Bagdad….by an indian astronomer.
The Arabs ,in this story,are therefore transmitters,not discoverers.
Kurt Vonnegut,in this story as well as in others….. a bullshitter.
Posted by george babushes on Sep 20, 2004 at 3:55 PM
Why does any of this matter? A: French people are retards. B: Kurt Vonnegut is a retard. C: I’m a retard. D: If I’ve learned anything from Kurt Vonnegut, it’s that we’re all mean-spirited, spiteful and petty. And there’s not much you can do to save yourself from that, and the human race is far beyond anyone’s scope. Kurt Vonnegut may or may not have his facts straight. (If you would stop being a psuedo intellectual and cited your sources like a high school freshman has to, I could verify or dismiss your arguments.) I, however, have heard from college professors and doctors of math that the Middle Eastern cultures did concieve the first symbol for null. Not to say that they know, only that I’d believe them before I’d take your word for it. However, that hardly answers the rest of the argument of American’s perception of middle eastern/muslim individuals as “camel jockeys” and “towel heads” How did this essay in anyway indicate apathy towards Europeans? I would think that responsible consumerism and new technologies would benefit all people, and I believe that’s what was advocated in this article, along with other common themes of Vonnegut’s, human decency, civil rights, and (true) Christian morals. I still feel to see why you brand him a bullshitter, but I’ll leave you with this: I’ve paid $5-15 for every book he’s ever seen fit to print, including short story and prose collections. I’m not alone in this, he is one of the most read, respected and referenced living writers. You, however… I doubt your sophoric hype would sell a single copy. Am I wrong?
Maybe a bullshitter, but at least he has something to say, and can amuse readers while informing them. You do niether. Warmest regards.
Posted by John on Sep 20, 2004 at 5:06 PM
Mr. Vonnegut,
You make some very valid conclusions about how our country is unhuman and we are addicts of materialism. I also agree with you that power corrupts us, I don’t agree with the the acusations you arose to the reason for us being in war. I believe it to be extreamly disrespectful to make remarks about the president of the United States. To disagree with certain policies and descions is ok, but to mock and ridicule is another. These are the political leaders of our nation and by saying that they are power drunk is a slap in the face to your own nation you live in. Soldiers are out there risking their lives for us, and you go and critize what its all about. What our country needs right now is like your son said for eachother to help one another. Rather we disagree or agree with war, we need to respect those brave soldiers and give them our prayers and comfort. The only reason we are in war right now is because of the tragedy on 9/11. Of course there are other under lying factors such as oil, but that is not the reason we are in war. The president of the United States is sending a message that we are strong and aren’t going to let terroists defeat us. Before you go and voice your opinions you need to realize the extent of your remarks and that your arguments are very one sided.
Posted by Lala on Sep 24, 2004 at 4:07 PM
Lala, I’m going to try to keep my cool about this. Your comments were infuriating. Perhaps you haven’t been clued in yet, so let this be our opportunity.
The war in Iraq has nothing, NOTHING to do with the terrorist attacks of Sept 11, 2001. Iraq was in no way involved in those attacks. The invasion and occupation of Iraq is a terrible mistake, and our troops are paying the price. Those soldiers enlisted to defend our country with their lives. They are victims of the filthiest fraud; they have been tricked into giving up their lives and taking the lives of countless others for reasons other than the defense of their country.
Research Depleted Uranium
Research Cluster bombs
Research the number of Iraq wounded
And I challenge you to do as thorough a search as possible for any evidence that Iraq had anything to do with the Sep. 11 attacks. I can tell you you won’t find any, aside from Bush, Rumsfeld and Rice lying to you that there is, but I don’t want you to take my word for it. Search high and low, and discover the horrible lie that has sent our children to killing, poisoning, dismemberment and death.
And be sure you’re registered to vote on Nov 2nd. If you’re not, remember the deadline to register is rapidly approaching.
Because America is a democracy, the blood is on all our hands. (U.S. people, I mean)
Posted by Mr. F. on Sep 24, 2004 at 5:36 PM
NOTHING HURT. Attention must be paid.
Posted by mike on Sep 24, 2004 at 6:44 PM
Lala,
America has a solid history of “dissing” the sitting president. It comes with the territory. And Bush is very deserving: He’s a boob of the first order. Do not equate the President with the country; he’s an employee, and not a very good one. I look forward to firing the bastard on Nov. 2. And just to set things straight: our soldiers are fighting in Afghanistan because of 9/11. I’ve yet to hear a single good reason as to why they are also fighting in Iraq. And yes, our servicemen and servicewomen deserve our support, which includes standing up to our officials and their wreckless policies. “My country, right or wrong” should not be an affirmation of blind faith but rather one of responsibility, one I take very seriously. Lastly, opinions are by their nature one-sided. Vonnegut’s only duty is to call it like he sees it, not to present the other side’s arguement for them.
Posted by merklee on Sep 24, 2004 at 6:57 PM
Hank pretty much sums it all up for me. Let’s go have some coffee somewhere.
Posted by TuesdayPillow on Sep 26, 2004 at 12:50 PM
vonnegut is astounding
i met my best friend because we were in the same english class and one day he shoved “breakfast of champions” at me and said i might like it.
i just finished timequake
this man is addicting
and hilarious
and everyone who posted on here with pretentious blather about the origins of zero and how atheism is stupid is really missing the point.
please PLEASE keep writing
and i promise that when you die i’ll make sure to say “kurt is in heaven now”
Posted by annie on Sep 27, 2004 at 8:12 PM
I don`t recall anyone saying atheism is stupid. I DO, however, recall several atheists showing no reservations about gratuitously shitting on religious people as being intellectually inferior. Anyone out there actually reading what`s being posted?
Easily fooled. Hank pisses on Christianity, then turns around and uses lawyer`s logic to pretend that he did nothing of the sort. And you fall for it. The blind leadeth the blind. Anyone who claims that a question doesn`t count as an argument has clearly never read Plato. Reading Rainbow, eh?
People shit on religion on this thread, not a peep out of anyone. Hey, that`s totally cool, apparently. You people must have done a lot of traveling around the globe, to be so tolerant. Someone DARES to consult, oh I don`t know, religious doctrine in a discussion on the topic of “why we`re here,” and it`s oh those facist hypocrites are oppressing us poor superior intellectuals again! When will we ever be free?
The worst thing about reactionary bigots, (They`re called “wolves in sheep`s clothing”), even worse than all the witch-burning and crusading, is the fact that they drive people further away from seeking any kind of spiritual truth. A culture gets so drowned in Jerry Falwells and Jim Joneses that people assume that that`s all there is to any kind of religion and want no part of it.
The fact that Hank only thought of the God of the reactionary wolves when I brought up the word “divine” is a perfect illustration of what I`m talking about.
I`d argue that Webster`s Collegiate Dictionary is not the best place to find the meaning of the word “divine,” but even if you do play it that way, I have a 1977 Webster`s Collegiate Dictionary, too. The word SACRED appears as a synonym.
The problem here is dualistic thinking. The question is not atheism vs theism. That`s just another deceptive duality. Things are infinitely more complex.
Hank, I believe you are not an atheist who arrived at atheism after a spiritual quest, or as a result of having never been exposed to religion. I believe you are a typical Bible Belt atheist. (For those of you not from the U.S., the “Bible Belt” is a geographical region of the Southern United States characterized by a strong presence of Protestant Christianity.) You grew up with reactionary preachers shoving their fundamentalism down your throat (which, in the Bible Belt, is often pretty light on the gospels, the actual teachings of Jesus, and heavy on Old Testament and Paul), then decided you`d had enough lies and slammed the doors on the divine forever without ever doing much digging into what might possibly be hidden from view. You went straight from Paul to Nietsche without making any significant stops along the way. Now you pat yourself on the back for being intellectually superior. Then you wonder what that empty feeling inside you could possibly be.
Posted by MISTER AND MIZZES JUST WON`T GO AWAY WITH THOSE DA on Sep 28, 2004 at 5:44 AM
Look, no-one pissed on your religion. But here’s the summary of our side “What that empty feeling is inside.” When I get that feeling, I ussually eat. You went with Jesus… ok, different strokes. I’m an omnitheist, and I believe in everything. I believe that if God exists, he’s an asshole for not coming down here and straightening things out. Ever read “The Barnhouse Effect”? from “Welcome to the Monkey house?” Why can’t god find and disarm the nukes?
I also believe that if he doesn’t maybe humans should know that and realize it’s about time we tried to cover our own asses and helping ourselves out. Maybe that’s overestimating the human capacity, but I’m an optimist.
Posted by John on Sep 28, 2004 at 6:34 AM
I expected the food joke.
I`m on my lunch break, so I gotta keep this short.
Presumtuous of you to say that I went with Jesus. I never said I did.
Ah, the old “Why does God allow evil in the world” question. Like I said, it`s my lunch break, so forgive me if I don`t put this quite as beautifully as I can. I think God (the universal intelligence, the omnipresent eternal vibration, however you want to phrase It) wants us to grow up, learn how to handle our own shit, accept the responsibility that comes with power. We can`t do that if God just comes along and wipes our butts every time we soil ourselves. We`ll just be in eternal cosmic diapers. I think you`re right about us helping each other out, I think that`s part of the point, that`s what we`re supposed to learn. That`s what Dr. Vonnegut said, isn`t it? And isn`t that what Hank hinted at when he admitted feeling sympathy for the sufferers of the world?
I gotta go.
Posted by MrMrsF on Sep 28, 2004 at 11:54 PM
Just a quick thought on religion and democracy and why democracy is NOT an ideal form of government.
When given a choice, the people asked to free Barabbas instead of Christ.
Posted by Bryce Albertson on Sep 30, 2004 at 2:20 PM
By that last comment, I didn’t mean to sound like a “bible thumper”, or whatever derogatory term is going around these days that means “someone who can’t keep their religion in their pants, er, to themselves”, it was just an interesting thought.
Also, I’m not trying to bash democracy, the American government or organized religion. Not that any of those institutions are without flaw.
I believe if you’re gonna bash something, you should be able to back up your negative comment by showing a better way to do it.
Like with that whole “if you don’t vote, you have no right to complain” thing. I’ve solved that. I vote Libertarian. Not that I support the cause, mind you. I just know that the Libertarian candidate isn’t going to win. That way, no matter what… republican or democrat… may happen, I retain my right to complain.
Posted by Bryce Albertson on Sep 30, 2004 at 2:37 PM
I know I know… I’ll shut up after this post. I just read the post about athiest’s being intellectually superior to the religious. I’ll give my worthless pespective on both sides…
Side ONE: PRO ATHEIST.
Some religious people make themselves appear inferior because they do not question anything. Creationists could be the most intelligent folk on the planet, but they could never prove it to me.
“It says right here in Genesis that he created this on that day…” So, What day did the lord create Apatosaurus again? We’ve got skeletal remains that prove he was here, but it’s not in the book…
Here’s another… people were built to last back in the old testament days, weren’t they? If I recall correctly, Moses lived to be over 900 years old, according to the good book. Or did the earth just orbit the sun faster back then… hmm…
Side TWO: Pro Religious
Ok, now you atheists get to prove how smart you are. You can show me how life on earth came from the sea (according to “Galapogos”, it’s goin’ right back, too) You can tell me how the universe was created. The big bang you say? Makes sense to me.
You can also ask questions like “why can’t God just find and disarm the nukes like prof. Barnhouse?”
Being a christian, well more like a ‘hypochristian’, I can’t give you an answer for that any better than the one you’ve come to hate so much, that God works in mysterious ways.
So not only can you answer the big how questions, you can ask why questions that the religous can’t answer? That makes you superior, eh?
Will since you can prove so many other things, here are a couple more for ya.
1. Explain WHY the big bang occurred.
2. Explain WHY evolution occurred, so that life could continue to flourish on this planet, rather than just die off.
Also, if you do not believe in a god, Christian or otherwise, or life after death and believe that mankind is the highest form of evolution thusfar, not only do you come off as arrogant, you probably need to stay close to a Prozac salt-lick… It’s basically like saying people are the highest form of life in the universe. Geez… if we’re the best the universe has to offer, no wonder it’s so sparsly populated.
last questions:
3. If there is no life after death, and you die tomorrow, then what exactly was the point of living anyway?
4. How can you possibly smile?
So there. Both sides of the debate. I’ve managed to prove neither side right or wrong, just like none of you will either. We’ve been asking these questions ever since we’ve been capable of thought. We ain’t gonna get it now.
Evolutionists? What say we go ask the Dolphins? From what I understand, they are brighter than us anyway…
One last kinda funny thought. Jehova’s witnesses? If there really are only 144,000 people gonna make it to heaven like you say, why the hell are you so active in recruiting? Doesn’t that lessen your chances?
bye…
Posted by bryce albertson on Sep 30, 2004 at 3:36 PM
Mr Vonnegut seems to have learned nothing of the true nature of our society in all these 81 years. He hasn’t learned that socialism is a joke that goes against human nature. That motivation to do evil stems from the oppression that is socialism. That with no system of reward or punishment by our very human nature we are not motivated to do good works. That only in freedom, in true liberty, can things be good and right. I would call him an idiot if I didn’t feel so sorry for him.
Posted by Justin LaCount on Sep 30, 2004 at 6:35 PM
Holy crap, Justin. You don’t understand socialism OR liberty, do you? I need to quote Mr. Vonnegut here, from “Fates Worse Than Death.”
“Dear Dean Paul H. Jones —
Our friend Ollie sent me a copy of your letter to him, written immediately after my speech out there.
I am a fourth-generation German-American religious skeptic (“Freethinker”). Like my essentially puritanical forebears, I believe that God has so far been unknowable and hence unservable, hence the highest service one can perform is to his or her community, whose needs are quite evident. I believe that virtuous behavior is trivialized by carrot-and-stick schemes, such as promises of highly improbable rewards or punishments in an improbable afterlife. (The punishment for counterfeiting in Henry VIII’s reign, incidentally, was being boiled alive in public.) The Bible is a useful starting point for discussions with crowds of American strangers, since so many of us know at least a little something about it. It has the added virtue of having for contributors at least two geniuses—Moses and Christ.
Jesus is particularly stimulating to me, since he noticed what I can’t help noticing, that life is so hard most people are losers or feel like losers, so that a skill essential to most of us, if we are to retain some shred of dignity, is to show grace in defeat. That to me is the lesson he taught while up on the cross, whether he was God or not. And he was neither the first nor the last human being, if that is what he was, to teach that while in unbelievable agony.
As for the preaching of formal Christianity, I am all for it. As you saw with your own eyes, I myself have done that, and have done it without pay here in Baghdad on the Subway at the Cathedral of St. John the Divine and St. Clement’s Church. My St. Clement’s sermon can be found at the end of my book Palm Sunday, which also contains my words at Lavina Lyon’s funeral out that way.
What I can’t stand are sermons which say that to believe in the divinity of Jesus is a way towin.
Fraternally yours,
Kurt Vonnegut”
Posted by merklee on Sep 30, 2004 at 6:50 PM
I think it’s a gorgeous sign that so many articulate and educated people post responses to Vonnegut’s articles. I think it is a credit to the type of people he appeals to, as well as how inspiring he is for aspiring writers. I will simply say that reading Vonnegut always makes me feel better. This can be a difficult task in light of all the problems the world faces in combination with the little ones that consume me. Most people, I think, find God or some such entity to assure them that they are not alone, to comfort them, to quiet their hearts and minds. I lack that faith and so lack that outlet. But I always have Vonnegut. He gives form to the feelings and ideas that haunt me, lends me the words that I cannot find. He consistently and effectively reminds me that I am not alone - no faith in the supernatural required. It’s always nice when we can find comfort in other human beings. Why? Because they are both real and readily available. Thank you sir.
Posted by Dane on Oct 1, 2004 at 9:45 AM
you all are retarded. get a life, seriously. no one gives a sh*t about your psuedointellectual garbage. leave your half-wit philosophies to the real authors.
Posted by s_u_i_c_i_d_e_b_o_y on Oct 5, 2004 at 12:28 PM
Yeah, so, anyway, ignoring that last comment, well thought-out as it was (In fact the comment seems oddly familiar), it’s nice to see things getting interesting. This thread is actually approaching something resmbling a forum ater all, now that the extremists have had their fun and cooler heads seem to be rising to the surface.
I’d like to stress again the perils of thinking dualistically. Dualities are deceptive oversimplifications. Hence the expression “both sides of the argument” is deceptive, because it suggests being on one side or the other. Like Vonnegut said “What could be simpler?”
Referencing what one or another source of teachings has to say doesn’t make one an adherent of said philosophy. I should be able to consult what Jesus or Moses or Socrates or Mohammed or The Buddha or Confucious or The Dalai Lama or Dick Gregory or Darwin or Sartre or Dostoyevsky or Nietzche or Voltaire or Emerson or Einstein or Jimi Hendrix said about something without being immediately labeled a religious nut or pseudo-philosopher or existentialist or transcendentalist or secular humanist or evolutionist or hippie. Just because I consult what Jesus said doesn’t automatically make me anti-Darwin, nor does my referencing Hawkins make me anti-God.
On the question of “Why Are We Here,” is it any suprise that we might consult what Jesus said? Or the Dalai Lama? Or even Mark Twain or Shakespeare? What’s the hang up?
I don’t know how it is in other countries, but in the U.S., our school reading lists are filled with garbage. No Plato, no Kirkegaard, no Nietzche, no Darwin, no Einstein, no Hawking. DEFinitely no Moses, Jesus, Mohammed, no Confucius, Buddha or Vedas. We avoid addressing the great questions altogether, and only manage to skirt them by assigning an endless list of fiction to our students. Pride and Prejudice, Great Gatsby, Wuthering Heights, Great Expectations. It’s a safe way to avoid conflicts of church and state, and so most Americans know next to nothing about the dialogues of Socrates, or the writings of Einstein. No understanding of the influence of the spread of Christianity on Middle Eastern and European thought, or of the spread of Islam centuries later.
To misunderstand the history of religion and philosophy is to misunderstand human history itself. Questions of what we’re doing and how we got here cannot be addressed with any degree of accuracy without an understanding of the development of religious and philosophical thought. They are one and the same. The development of religion and philosophy are so closely tied to the development of our cultures, our politics, even our languages. Ignoring these influences is like trying to understand poetry without an understanding of the language it’s written in.
Posted by mrandmrsjohnqfruitcakes on Oct 6, 2004 at 5:31 AM
Thanks to Mr. Vonnegut for sharing his wisdom once again. How is it that within moments of beginning to read his essay, I found myself transported to that very place his writing always transports me—a state of sad comfort where a light shines on the ugliness and by doing so, makes our possibilities beautiful? I can only hope that in my little run on this planet I can come to understand as he does, and in my turn, share it with others who may need it. And so it goes . . . .
Posted by Chris Ransick on Oct 6, 2004 at 8:39 AM
EVERYBODY!!! Just shut the f**k up already and go live your lives! All these posts don’t make the world ANY better. If you think you have “a better way” then just go live your life as an example to those around you.
Posted by Smith on Oct 7, 2004 at 2:08 AM
Hey mrandmrsjohnqfruitcakes,
“...now that the extremists have had their fun and cooler heads seem to be rising to the surface.
I’d like to stress again the perils of thinking dualistically. Dualities are deceptive oversimplifications.”
This is an understatement from the man/woman him/herself. You started posting as “mrandmrsjohnq” and after a bit of bonding you changed to “mister fruitcakes”. Now you call yourself “mrandmrsjohnqfruitcakes” and refer to yourself and others as “cooler heads”
Two words that come to mind is WANKER and SCHIZOPHRENIA.
“A little reminder. The reason you are reading this, and perhaps posting here, is because you clicked on a little link titled “discuss this topic.” The “topic” is a piece which mentions Jesus and Christianity quite frequently in its context. It’s irrational to ask everyone to leave it out of the equation. I respectfully submit that you may be in the wrong thread.”
MrWister you missed the point of my post. Nothing new as allot of people have said a lot and others have missed the point, including myself. Maybe this site has distilled the cooler heads and some progress is being made. Maybe not.
Where do we come from? – who the #### cares. Where are we going? – with what we know about our past we should have a fair idea, but lets get on with killing each other over religion or whatever is al la mode as there is evidently nothing in history to contradict this.
History is written by the victors, so what would make any bible immune from this statement. Anything that man lays his fingers on turns to shit. I question our rank in the food chain or our intellect.
We are insecure as a species. It comes with the territory. Look at the bible and the threat that if you do not believe in God you are doomed to everlasting hell filled with fire… Leave it be people.
We are wasting life’s precious seconds on reaching for something that is just out of our reach. Everything we need is in front of us. Dim witted people like BUSH and other like him do not have the balls to accept that as the challenge. No imagination and it is easier to get peoples attention through terror then to do good. Charity begins at home, BUSH and others like him ignore the concept.
To all you posters. Stop the talk and do the walk. Get of your lazy asses and do some good. Start by getting your current dick out of the White House. Before and after that do something that makes you feel better. Help an old lady, give someone a gap on the road, get a tin of food and share it amongst the stray cats and dogs in your area. Donate a F9/11 dvd to someone who has not seen it. Sit a republican down and tell him that you also need to take a shit from time to time and that you do sleep at night. Ask him/her to pinch you so that they KNOW you are real just like them. Pinch them and know that they are real people with real concerns, instead of bashing each other over a fuck nut like BUSH.
Mister Fruitcake, for the record, I personally enjoy pulling my wire so no hard feelings. I also am a Gemini. Probably a bit schizophrenic. Too much grass I guess or dagga as its called back home.
I read a book by Stephen King recently “ Hearts in Atlantis”. Allot of the book takes part around the Vietnam story. If Kings portrayal about how people protested and questioned why the troops were there, it sounds like history repeated itself in Vietnam. The war in Iraq was before Vietnam, right? Or have we learnt nothing from history. This makes your last statement Mister Fruitcake redundant.
Posted by Watson on Oct 8, 2004 at 3:38 AM
First things first, Vonnegut was one of my favorite authors in my formative days. No no, to all the life begins at conception people ... I’m not talking about my gametogenesis ... simply early manhood ( please note that I’ve incorporated the more techno popular double dot dot dot into my writings rather than the double dash that Mr. Vonnegut prefers - but the parentheses are his ) - um ... forgive the subsequent dashes. Anyway, it seems to me that the article of his - this WAS inspired by his article wasn’t it? - ( Damn it! I just used “his” double dashes and now because of it, I’ve now burned up all my alloted parentheses for this retort ) triggered many eclectic responses, with many points of view, from many a bright mind. Whether these opinions are in agreement or in opposition ( note that I used the more fanciful word to support the negative, thus giving it a greater call to attention ) - and now I’ve exceeded my parenthesis use! - the one thing that strikes me is the underpinning of anger in most of the prose. He writes his article, as many good writers do, from an obvious point of view. One could argue that journalists should be mandatorily objective and that they should be excluded from my preceding sentence, but why beat that dead horse when it no longer even looks like a mammal. Anyway it seems to me that the content of the article stirred some debate, but the perspective of the author and subsequent writers facilitated a much more vehement ( or is it vociferous? ) discussion. This was just a mere observation I wanted to share. I have no thoughts to share on the origin of zero, no expositions on Christ, Moses or Confuscious, and no specific ramblings on Bush, Kerry, Moe or Curly; they’ve all been previously discussed with great detail, enthusiasm, and yes ... anger. I guess in closing does anyone else wonder from time to time if the world be better if our journalists’ commentaries included the penis sizes of Mr. Bush, Mr. Kerry, Saddam and Bin Laden? Maybe not. But it would make me smile. Maybe you would too.
And so it goes.
Posted by halincoh on Oct 10, 2004 at 6:20 PM
Well said, halincoh, but, relevant as it may be, I would never joke about a man’s penis size, for fear of the possibility of reincarnation.
No hard feelings, Watson. Wank your wire all you want. It beats making war.
As for killing each other over religion, well, wars are historically fought over cold hard cash. Religion just makes a useful tool for convincing people to go to war.
I haven’t read Hearts in Atlantis, but King was alive during the Vietnam era. If you are interested, I highly reccomend researching some of the wealth of nonfiction dedicated to the “Indochina Wars,” as the U.S. government officially refers to them. It’s powerful stuff. And HELL YES people protested! Are you talking about U.S. people? OF COURSE we protested! I get the impression from your post that this is the first you’ve heard of it, and if that’s true, it’s a hell of an eye-opener for me. What do citizens of the world think, that all Americans were in favor of the war in Vietnam?? Reading some pulp fiction reference to the protests is the first you’ve heard of them? That really troubles me.
The Vietnam conflict tore the U.S. apart. People rose up in protest constantly, and it wasn’t this lying-around-in-the-street-in-my-Ray-Bans-with-my-water-bottle, or I’m-going-to-show-everybody-my-tits-and-ass-and-then-they’ll-stop-the-war style protest. People were furious about what Johnson and Nixon were doing over there. They shouted at the tops of their lungs, knowing the police were coming with tear gas, dogs, and clubs. The police were generally more brutal back then than they are now. The protesters knew what they were in for, were clubbed, tear-gassed, and went to jail in droves. Young men burned their draft cards, and veterans returning home tore off their medals and hurled them to the ground. The anti-war movement was so strong it became a target of the FBI’s domestic counterintelligence ops. Protest groups were spied on, infiltrated, and disrupted. Their leaders were defamed, framed, harassed, and arrested. They were often arrested on fraudulent charges at specific times, like just before they were about to lead a protest; by the time they were cleared of charges, they had missed their appointments.
I could go on and on. But I’ve learned something new today. That’s what happens when people talk and listen to each other. Thake that, Smith. And calm down, too. I’ll say it once again, you’re reading this because you clicked on a link that said “discuss this topic.” What kind of a discussion is it if everyone just shuts the f**k up?
I counter, everybody DON’T shut the f**k up!
OPEN UP!
One last thing, I need a clarification from Watson. I don’t get what you mean by “This makes your last
statement Mister Fruitcake redundant.” Can you clear that up for me? I’m sorry to trouble you, I’m a little slow, what with all the voices in my head.
Posted by mrandmrschizophrenicakes on Oct 10, 2004 at 7:29 PM
All spelling errors are typos. And, to clarify, I have nothing against nudity. I’m for it. I was just drawing a contrast between the protesters of today and those of the ‘60s and ‘70s.
“I’ve often wondered, Deacon Ball, if atheism might even be popular with God himself.”
—The Night Thoreau Spent in Jail
Posted by mrvoicesinmymrsheadcakes on Oct 10, 2004 at 7:36 PM
Of course in old age and when pushed against the wall, all the quest for truth and pushing away bs goes down the drain; its the time to just claim adherence to a religion. In his case, christianity. What about what christianity has done against human beings since its begining? How many MILLIONS of people were killed, tortured and/or mentally raped because of the man that they worship?
Please, Mr. Vonnegut, I have been impressed with your writings until now, but I’d suggest you keep the ‘dirty little secret’ of what you cling to as belief, in the closet. Otherwise the basis of all your writings is exposed as a fraud- for after all, he has some ultimate little secret platform that he uses when push comes to shove.
I am not suggesting a man be without belief, but I am saying that someone writing as you do should keep his personal belief to himself. Actually, I believe seeing you say that- religion is between you and your Creator…
Posted by Lenny on Oct 11, 2004 at 4:17 AM
It’s essential in fairness and accuracy to separate Jesus from Christianity. Jesus never killed, tortured, or raped ANYbody. He never told anybody to do it, either, directly or indirectly. He instructed people to love God and love each other.
Posted by mrsandmrandbabyschizocake on Oct 11, 2004 at 5:54 AM
Mrvoicesinmymrsheadcakes,
History is the result of our actions, recorded by humans for future generations. It’s a one sided tale heaping glory on one and denying another. The last thing that history is is fair. The bible and the story of Jesus is no exception. Even this has had to stand mans meandering ways. And above all history is a general depiction of events. As about as general as my attempt to define the word and the significance that accompanies this word or the event.
History should for all that it is worth steer us clear of all the misery that we find ourselves in today. But it does not. Why is that. That’s why I said your last paragraph is redundant. Understanding history makes about as much sense as trying to predict a years supply of weather forecasts.
We find the time to entertain all kinds of atrocities after world war II and we still have not learnt a single thing, except of course that that the Germans were really bad and every one swears that they will never forget. Crap. We will forget, we forgot every significant event before world war II came along. We will forget and we will make the same mistakes over again.
Jesus was a good guy that got manipulated by man. Yes its man that kills in the name of Jesus. So take away that name which man uses all to often. I am not suggesting that religion be banned from peoples lifes. I am suggesting that people like you and me, like Kurt and this article, like a Jew or an Arab keep his faith between him and his god. There is absolutely no justification for any human being across the globe to publicly show off his her faith, including this article. Do we want only Christians to discuss the topic or would folk from lets say Iraq or Bombay or Angola also be welcome given their ethnic back rounds or their preferences concerning religion. The logic is as inhumanly bad as the missionaries going to blackest Africa to convert the natives.
Religion kills mate. Its the number one reason. Money is second. Get people to believe and soon you have a steady income of cash, blood and violence.
On this site allot of people are confused upset and simply pissed off. Like Smith who wants people to just shut up and get on with it. Well he or she is right. This is a discussion site. Allot of people do think hard before they speak and allot gets said and even more makes sense and yet we are no better off for it or are we?
What have you done Mr Wister since joining this site that is useful (besides your words of wisdom) what have you done that resembles good. What have all of you done.
I believe that we are good. Man is good and needs to do good else he poisons himself. We are good, so do something that is good.
I new about Vietnam before reading the book “Hearts in Atlantis”, it just struck me as being co-incidental that the book should be stating what we are going through at the moment. It would be good for Americans to read the book and wonder back to a time in history where you were faced with the same dilemma. That would give people a surreal perspective I am sure.
Also read “ The Source” by James Mitchener. Very good book about the Jewish faith and how it got the wrong end of the stick against Christianity and or Islam which by the way is regarded as the natural evolution of Christianity.
Posted by Watson on Oct 11, 2004 at 7:20 AM
‘...the greatest man that ever lived…’
This is offensive to me, and I’d assume offensive to many of his readers. To many, this was a man who may have had some good intentions, even if they were misguided; but he was most certainly not the greatest man that ever lived, nor the religion that was created after him anything to hold holy. Besides for that man himself, reference to him as a diety is not at all in the spirit of Kurt’s original writings. This is my primary point: regardless of what you think of Christianity, for Kurt to ‘fall back’ on the one liner that all fundamentalist Christians use is not excusable, in my opinion. He was a writer that endeavored to display the truth the way it is, period. Not belief in some man from 2000 years ago. And he did not aim to push people into a religion that puts people into a cage, as Christianity does (original sin, the pathetic concept of trinity, virgin mary etc etc…)
If you believe in the Creator, then DO and THINK as He wishes of you, do not just create a cult (ie. we believe such and such, lets now convince others to believe the same.)
In my opinion it is wrong- absolutely wrong- for him to mention the founder (not really the founder, but theoretically) of that religion, when what he has always written contradicts this idea. Might it be a revelation of what he has always held deep down? Might he be a complete fraud, because he always had this as his core belief? I dont know, but he should keep his little secrets to himself.
Posted by Lenny on Oct 11, 2004 at 3:33 PM
I think you’re all going a bit ‘round the bend. If you’ve read as much Vonnegut as you claim to have read, you’d know that he has always acknowledged Jesus as a real person. He has always expressed doubts about Jesus’s divinity. And he has always maintained that the primary error of Christianity was to place too much focus on the messenger and not the message. To Kurt, formal Christianity involves preaching the basic philosphy of Jesus, a philosophy, by the way, that was not at all original except perhaps in the phrasing (telling people the positive things they should do, rather than the negative things they should not). This does not make Vonnegut a closet Christian, but rather a humanist who can separate the wheat from the chaff of most religions and glean those things that are worthy of our consideration. ALL religious texts are the works of humans. Weed out the metaphysical mumbo jumbo and obvious bigotries, and you get some compelling suggestions on how to get through this thing, whatever it is. Thomas Jefferson tried to do this when he cut and pasted the New Testament (which, by the way, if you take Revelations seriously, ensured our Tom eternal damnation). Make no mistake: Kurt has been and will always be a humanist.
Posted by merklee on Oct 11, 2004 at 4:50 PM
Organized religion in the hands of the wise can serve as a template for benevolent behavior. However, if power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely, then any VERY powerful, especially an extremist, form of organized religion in the hands of a fool functions as nothing more than a hot plate for a deadly combination for self righteous, self serving, and malicious behavior elevating corruption to frequently catastrophic levels. This world has far too many fools. For a vehement treatment on religious fanatacism from a deliciously warped and dark mind, please see Chuck Palahniuk’s SURVIVOR.
Okay ... if penis sizes of our world leaders , good and bad, past and present, ala Breakfast of Champions, doesn’t float your boat, how ‘bout the 21st century of such nonsense: bobble head dolls! You could collect them all: Saddam, Bin Laden, Bush, Kerry, Moses, Muhammad, Jesus, Cheney ( GOTTA have a Cheney! ), Cal Ripken, Garfield ( the dead president, not the cat ), Col Sanders, Martin Luther King, Eddie Van Halen, and Carrot Top. All yours for only $99.99. For those with no penises $79.95. Call today!
Posted by halincoh on Oct 11, 2004 at 6:25 PM
Ah Kurt Vonnegut’s dark humor at its finest. Yet he has a very valid point. We are all just hypocrites about to pay the price for our lifestyles. Violence on TV, both fiction and non-fiction, the rich making money off of EVERYTHING they can, and our dense red neck president trying to prove something. All I can say is don’t you just love America?
Posted by DarkestHumor on Oct 13, 2004 at 2:58 PM
Now that you all feel better….turn off your televisions, talk to your neighbors, and ride a bicycle whenever you can to do simple errands and commutes.
Posted by jack on Oct 15, 2004 at 9:24 AM
Just when this discussion is getting interesting again, my computer crashes. Thanks, Symantec.
Wanna throw in a couple of relevant points, here:
Learning history is not the same as learning FROM history. Your example of the Third Reich makes a decent example. You said the only thing we learned was that the Germans were really bad. But the lesson many agree is worth taking from the Nazis is that all of us have the potential for being “really bad.” Anyone who ever took a basic psychology class will remember the now-famous experiment conducted by Stanley Milgram in the early ‘60s that demonstrated everyday people’s willingness to torture people when commanded to do so, even as their victims screamed for mercy. Anyone who doesn’t know what I’m talking about should do a quick keyword search for an eye-opener. We make a tragic mistake when we refuse to face the fact that the men and women who became the Nazis were not dragons or faeries, they were normal everyday people. We like to think of them as somehow different from the rest of us because that way we can avoid confronting the reality that that same potential for evil rests inside us. We ignore such a lesson at our peril, by vainly refusing to accept this valuable lesson, we doom ourselves to the repeat of history. ( COUGHguantanomoAHEM)
As for the assertion that religion kills. I’ll retort by asserting that we humans seem quite capable of killing each other regardless of the presence or absence of religion.
Mass murder rape torture looting and destruction with religion:
Crusades
Columbus
Spanish Inquisition
Israel/Palestine
Mass murder rape torture looting and destruction without religion:
Stalin
Khmer Roughe
Mao
Third Reich
Seems to me the mass murderers just use religion when it’s convenient or necessary, like when the people who they’re trying to send into the battlefield are religious, meaning their leaders have to somehow convince them that their god really wants them to go to war.
Posted by the schizocakes. yes it's me. us. on Oct 17, 2004 at 4:52 AM
Schizocakes makes (make) a good point. I would only add that Hitler also believed he was doing God’s work (see “Mein Kampf”).
I ask you all to read Laurence Britt’s article “Fascism Anyone?”
http://www.secularhumanism.org/library/fi/britt_23_2.htm
and see if you don’t agree we (America) are all stumbling headlong into fascism.
Posted by merklee on Oct 17, 2004 at 5:29 AM
Lenny, I think your comment betrays a lack of understanding. In all of Jesus’ recorded teachings, there is no mention of him saying anything about the divine trinity, the original sin, or the immaculate conception. All of that was tacked on later. After almost 2000 years, people are still debating, disagreeing, and accusing each other of heresy over stuff like talking snakes, pregnant virgins, and trinities, when in fact, after nearly 2000 years of revisions, invasions, translations, politics, and heretics(alleged), in all of what is now accepted as the record of what Jesus said, (the Russian Orthodox, Catholic, King James, Good News, or any other version), Jesus supposedly never placed ANY importance on ANY of that stuff! Isn’t that interesting? Pick up any old Bible sometime and read all the red text. That’s the stuff Jesus supposedly said. Hint: it won’t take you long. And don’t be afraid. Just reading it doesn’t automatically make you a Jesus freak. You’ll be suprised at the difference between the garbage that reactionary fundamentalists shout in your ear and what’s actually written there on the page. Blaming Jesus for the Jerry Falwells and Columbuses of the world is like blaming Muhammad for the bin Ladens and Farrakhans.
I also think that if Vonnegut had mentioned ANY other person, Gandhi, Socrates, Jim Henson, even Muhammad, Gotama or Krishna, as being the greatest man that ever lived, you would not have felt compelled to write about finding it offensive. I accept the possibility that I could be dead wrong. Maybe you would have been just as offended and would have said as much. But I don’t think so. And we’ll never really know, will we? Only you know. I think I’m right, though.
I ask again. Why, in a discussion of “Why we’re here” must we refrain from referencing teachers whose teachings developed into religions? Pythagorus founded a religion, do I have to refrain from referencing him, too? Maybe we should remove the pythagorean theorem from our children’s textbooks lest they be exposed and corrupted.
How ‘bout religious leaders? I guess if I found anything Dr Martin Luther King Jr had to say useful, I had better just keep that nasty little secret to myself.
Why do we oppress ourselves this way?
Posted by mr and mrs heads in my voices on Oct 17, 2004 at 5:47 AM
One last thing before this net cafe closes, I think you speak volumes, Watson, in stating that everything we need and need to do is right in front of us.
And the Wister thing is going over my head. What does it mean?
Posted by mrandmrsCAKE on Oct 17, 2004 at 5:50 AM
Mr Wister I believe comes from a S. King novel. There is no significance attached to why I call you that other than for the fact that your names are long and change the whole time. Laziness on my part. From now on I will make sure I keep up with the times mrandmrsCAKE.
“Learning history is not the same as learning FROM history.” You are correct. I should have realised this and make the connection with a little story that I keep remembering.
An old man can sit his grandson down and tell him about all the things in life that he should avoid. Knowing this though, will not help the kid. Knowing the future in such general terms will not really help the kid unless he is traumatised by what his grand father says. I am a firm believer in making mistakes to learn from them. Obviously some mistakes are worth avoiding and then there are some mistakes the we would do best to experience.
What then is the purpose of history. To lets us know that we are all capable of doing extreme good as well as doing some very awful things to each other? In the case of Hitler this would serve as you say as a reminder to all of us that we are capable of doing exactly the same or worse. Two things that come to my mind are that one we are living in a science lab experimenting on different scenarios. We are therefore the scientists and mice at the same time. And two, Hitler and human beings like him are just the messengers. Sure nobody asked them to carry out what they did, but they proved a point. The experiment was successful. And this can also therefore be said about Bush. Until now his experiment is going according to plan and again he is the messenger and the results are quite clear. We are all capable of doing some really awful stuff. And if we are not then we are certainly capable of endorsing these actions. I am not sure which is worse. The scientist experimenting or the sponsors. I personally would go with the sponsors as being worse.
In the second world war the one country that shocked me more than Germany would be Italy. The Italians sided with Hitler because they were cowards. Protecting their own interests by siding with the one ideology that would ultimately claim their freedom anyway. You could respect Hitler because you know where you stood with him, but not a coward.
At the end of the day, what Bush is doing is clearly creating awareness and allot of good can come from this. So how do we the inhabitants of planet earth, how do you liberals, democrats, republicans learn from this and make the right choices. What are the right choices? Everything has two sides to it. Any choice has good and bad in it. It would be fair to say though that whatever choice is made, the first action that should come out of this is that human life is not called into question. And I am not talking about shoot now and lets ask questions later as in Bush’s case. By making sure that human life is priority number one, you can not go wrong, especially if it is you who are occupying another country. To all the republican folk out there, think about that.
JANE ELLIOTT, one of Americas greatest gifts to the world. For those of you who have not heard of her, she carried out an experiment about 30 years ago in a class room. The experiment was to make half of the class of young kids believe that they were superior to the other by the colour of the kids eyes. So if you had brown eyes you were dumb and if you had blue eyes you were smart. Well the experiment worked. The one thing that J. Elliott mentions in the film as part of the story is the following.
As an example she used Hitler as the monster who had captured thousands of people from all over the world. He and the SS paid periodical visits and took prisoners to the gas chambers. The story unfolds like this.
“… When they (Hitler’s and the SS) came for the French, I was not French so I did nothing.
When they came for the Italians, I was not Italian, so I did nothing.
When they came for the Polish, I was not Polish so I did nothing.
When they came for the Americans, I was not American so I did nothing.
When they came for the Jews, I was not Jewish and therefore did nothing, and when they came for me there was nobody left to help me…”
This little story should serve to remind all of us at this moment that they (us being the Scientists) are coming for us and we need all of you to help make sure the right choices are made.
http://www.horizonmag.com/4/jane-elliott.asp
I apologise for not addressing all of the good points made above in other posts. This has become a bit of a take what you want and post what you want site without really focusing on all the valid points made. I am certainly one of them.
And lastly, maybe religion is not responsible for being the number one killer, but it is sure as hell used allot to create an association between what people hold dear and the eminent threat. AkA “Axis of Evil”
Posted by Watson on Oct 18, 2004 at 5:31 AM
mrandmrsCAKE,
Is this the end of the line? No more posts or no more interest and therefore no more posts.
*****************************************
Good Judgement comes from experience, and
experience comes from bad judgement.
*****************************************
Posted by Watson on Oct 22, 2004 at 6:46 AM
Perhaps the Federal Government should be run like a Reality Show. George “monkeyman” Bush could then be voted off the island by the poplar vote at any time.
It’s already happened in the land of fruits and nuts, so why not DC?
Posted by S.E. Booth on Oct 23, 2004 at 3:29 PM
My computer’s still fried. Too bad, like I said before.
I have more to say and I’m sure other people do, too. Just have limited access to the net. Enough about me, though.
This thread seems to go through lulls, periods of high and low activity. I wouldn’t give up.
I agree with what you said about the school of experience. I also am a firm believer in it.
However…
We aren’t children, we are adults (I assume) and our cognitive processes are different, to a certain degree.
I want to expand on this thought…later.
Meanwhile just call me Sybil
Posted by mrandmrs, aw, hell, you know... on Oct 23, 2004 at 8:58 PM
Kurt,
Just thought I’d let you know that I’m nineteen, I’ve been inspired by you for years, and I’m going to change the world for the better.
I’m a writer too you see, though I haven’t published anything (come to think of it I haven’t even really written anything big), and I just thought you’d like to know that, yes, the world is filled with morons and pretentious fucks…but there’s still hope.
Thankyou for speaking to us, the world I mean, especially those future thinkers of the world who sometimes feel lonely.
Truly,
Michael
Posted by Michael Solana on Oct 24, 2004 at 6:18 PM
All right man!! Kurt Vonnegut smoked a J!! I wanted to find out if he ever did for a while.
Posted by ben on Oct 28, 2004 at 4:33 PM
“Here’s what I think the truth is: We are all addicts of fossil fuels in a state of denial, about to face cold turkey.”
A little poetic license here. We’re not about to run out of oil, we’re about to hit Hubert’s Peak—the top of the bell shaped oil production curve.
The U.S. hit Hubert’s peak in 1970 at around 10 million barrels a day. Now we produce barely over half that.
The Energy Information Agency, which keeps track of these things, puts out a monthly report of the oil production in 30 countries plus a catch-all “other.” Of those, 12 are now in decline, inlcuding such major producers as Norway, the United Kingdom, Indonesia, and Venezuela. Altogether these 12 countries are 8 million barrels a day below their peak production. Last year alone they lost over a million barrels a day of production.
With every new country that rolls over into decline, it makes it that much harder for the remaining countries to replace the loss plus keep up with increasing demand (lately lead by the Chinese who want they’re own auto indutry just like us.)
The Saudis sent a chill through the market recently when, after promising to increase their production, all they could come up with some very poor grade, heavy oil. The Suadi’s were supposed to be able to carry the load for several more decades. But like all OPEC countries, the Saudis lie about how much oil they have left.
Something to think about this Turkey Day.
Posted by Tim on Nov 3, 2004 at 4:51 AM
Jus wanna say that it was NOT the Arabs who came up wid the zero and algebra, it was an Indian Mathmatician named ARYABHATTA.
Posted by dead on Apr 23, 2007 at 1:08 PM
Well, how ‘bout that. It’s been over two years. ‘Feels like twice that. I remember what stopped this discussion. It was the outcome of the November 2004 election. Stopped us all dead in our tracks. At least that’s how I’ve always seen it. I’ve often thought about checking back in, maybe rekindling the discussion and seeing how people have been affected by all that’s gone under the bridge since then. It was a pretty good group we had, as discussion boards go. I have to hand it to “In These Times” for keeping the line open. Anybody else out there from the old crew? Maybe Mr. Vonnegut’s passing will bring new posts and new thoughts to the table.
Well, I do recall that, somewhere within the course of the past two years, I finally came to understand and see the truth of this:
“There is a tragic flaw in our precious Constitution, and I don
Posted by AhClem on Apr 24, 2007 at 7:41 PM
SAVE 53% OFFTHE NEWSSTAND PRICE!
Reader Comments
Power corrupts us . Absolute power .
Isn’t this concept more appropriate in a totalitarian context,of communist nature to be precise ?
For America,and therefore the rest of the world,shouldn’t we be speaking of absolute (free) capitalism ?
And,all things considered,isn’t Kurt Vonnegut quite happy to be living in that system?
For with the excesses capitalism may produce also comes the diversity and freedom that characterizes American society .
The Arabs did -not- invent the numbers we use.The Indo Europeans did.As well as the zero. It appeared in 458 AD in an indian cosmology treaty.Defined in 628 by Brahmagupta as the result of a whole number substracted from itself.
It was not before the eight century that the zero,as well as the rest of the Indo Europeans numerals,was introduced at the court of Bagdad….by an indian astronomer.
The Arabs ,in this story,are therefore transmitters,not discoverers.
Kurt Vonnegut,in this story as well as in others….. a bullshitter.
The parallel between Native Americans and today’s baghdadis : Bullshit.
The disconnection of the free press? It does smell a bit country-ish to me .
The Jerry Garcia cameo: OK,it is certainly true,but—- who the hell cares !! And what relevance besides trying to play the post-hippy string in American liberals ?
Cold turkey on fossil fuels ?
Now,what would cold turkey be ?( apart from a sudden ice age befalling and freezing the activity of a very cumbersome european neighbour,alas,let us not dream)
The 40-50 years of estimated world oil resources can probably be extended another 30 with the exploitation of “heavy oils”,with a spectacular ecological result,but it still comes close to 80 years.
80 years may be cold turkey on the scale of history,but it doesn’t seem to be the
time table he’s talking about.
It seems the numerous offsprings of Kurt Vonnegut will be able to drive their car to work to pay,pay,pay for that Iraki bill…
The esteemed Mr. Vonnegut is, to my taste, the talent most akin to Emile Zola that American letters have been able to produce
That said, the careful observer Mr. V. repeats himself. There’s little except topical color in what he has written in “Cold Turkey” that differs from what he said in _Timequake_.
Still, “Cold Turkey” is worth publishing, because it excerpts this profoundly humane yet pessimistic author’s thought for those who haven’t been reading him for 40 years as many of us have!
My apologies for straying from the discussion of the essay. I just wanted to ask the author a question:
Mr. Vonnegut,
I’ve wanted to ask you a simple question for about 15 years now regarding your story, “Harrison Bergeron”. Is the main character’s name inspired by Henri Bergson?
Thanks,
Dan Florio
Hello Mr Vonnegut,
I hope you read these comments, but I think that you probably don’t since I hear you dislike computers. Personally, I think you need to give the internet more of a chance—it’s like colonial days all over again when people published pamphlets and articles anonymously and the printing press gave sudden forum to so many nimble minds.
Anyway, I love your books—I’ve read them all—and now can’t stop putting double dashes in nearly evey paragraph I write thanks to you! But what I wanted to comment on is your perspectives on providing child care and health care for eveyone and what Jesus would have thought about all of that. Of course he would have thought it a great idea—it was his after all, but the last thing he wanted was for government to do that job. What we need is not more government living under some sort of collective. Government only focuses on the “collect” part of collective. What we need is all of us with new ideas, forming cooperatives under our own design to provide for us in these ways. Jesus was the first libertarian. He wanted us to recognize a kingdom of God and a kingdom of man. The Romans, the Pharisees; they were the kingdom of man. WE are the kingdom of God.
We enter this world with free will and it is the basis of sin and redemption. Free will is the most basic and central Christian value. Governments on the other hand, deal in coercion. Governments don’t like free will and Jesus don’t like governments. We need to pull together as human beings in cooperatives and not care what the rich folks do. It’s the power of the government to take our money, skim their share, and then give back a pittance that even makes it possible to fight two wars on two fronts 4000 miles away.
And your son is right.
Hello Mr. Kurt Vonnegut
I thought some comments may give you a glimmer of hope for a humane and reasonable America before you do the big check out.
Our leaders are power-drunk but leaders can only lead where they have followers. The underlying problem is the support of the followers are consumption-drunk. The followers will do anything to protect their consumption.
While the corporations and government are not telling the truth they aren’t lying either. The people in these organizations really believe what they think. The people outside the organizations believe what the think. These and many other two opposing world views neutralize each other. This symmetry occurs over and over in human belief systems forming stable systems.
Today the global culture is addicted to fossil fuels but this has only been going on for a century and there are alternatives. What is deeply inbreded in our belief systems is the dependent on population growth which has been going on unabated for the last 10,000 years.
This is where the symmetry driving humanity can be broken. We know that the fertility rate of females is a function of education. By insuring that every human has access to the cultural innovations of reading, mathematics and music the fertility rate will drop for a time below the rate needed for replacement .
Our current system of socailization is totally inadaqunet for this task. The proposed solution for reducing the global population is preparing a small group of children for an information subsistence mode by enhancing early childhood development. The core system is the Urban Camp a series of 72 sites one for each month in a child’s life from 0 to 6. While all dimensions of childhood development will be addressed the greatest link between the industrial age and information age is in the area of intellectual development. The urban camp will enable children to decode reading, writing, language, math and music as part and simultaneously with their native language. The generic name of this system will be the Corporate Family Village.
“The first recorded zero is attributed to the Babylonians in the 3rd century BC. A long period followed when no one else used a zero place holder. But then the Mayans, halfway around the world in Central America, independently invented zero in the fourth century CE. The final independent invention of zero in India was long debated by scholars, but seems to be set around the middle of the fifth century. It spread to Cambodia around the end of the 7th century. From India it moved into China and then to the Islamic countries. Zero finally reached western Europe in the 12th century.”
- From “A Brief History of Zero” by Kristin McQuillin
Just to set the record straight…
Oh, and totalitarian rule is not specific to communism - which is more an economic system than a form of government (though admittedly economics and government often go hand in hand). It can manifest itself in any system in which the people are either deprived of OR ABJURE the power that they have.
I am the spouse of a civilian contractor in Iraq. What many of you would refer to as a “Mercenary”
I have a support group created for other contractors and their supporters. this venture has widely opened my eyes to the state the entire world is in. I have read more and learned more in the last 2 months than I have in a lifetime!
Prior to my awakening, the topic of the day was what happened on ER. Pretty sad indeed when you think about how many high school students are clueless as to what is going on in the world around them not to mention the adults who drive by me in their cars who are more worried about their IRA than the state of the nation.
I am amazed at the wisdom contained in Mr. Vonneguts post. At my ripe old age of 36 I already reconize the corruption of our political system and our society. I truly feel blessed to have attained even an ounce of the wisdom Mr. Vonnegut posseses.
I wish I had contributers such as him to my forum
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/civiliansinraq
I have about 91 members and I am continuosly being chastized for openly expressing my opinion, both good and bad. Mr. Vonnegut may want to reconsider his opinion of the interent. There are many who would like to hear what he has to say!
As a couple of people have already pointed out, the zero we use today was discovered in India. Not just zero, but in fact the basis of algebra too. It is credited to the Arabs because that was from whom the Europeans received it. However, as Al Khwarizmi himself states in his treatise on Algebra much of the material he was presenting was based on earlier Hindu (Indian) work. Florian Cajori, in his book a History of Mathematics states pretty much the same thing. Just to set another record straight.
cheers
Ah, yes, humanity at its finest.
Here we are, faced not only with the opportunity to respond directly to the ideas of a celebrated yet controversial author, but also to openly discuss urgent national and global issues, and what do we do?
Waste time and valuable life debating the curious adventures of that encouragable lil’ fella, Zero.
Whether or not Mr. Vonnegut is mistaken concerning the origins of zero is irrelevent; the point he was making, at least as I in my feeble abilities understand it, is that Arabic, or better yet Islaamic, cultures have made many, many valuable contributions to the world at large. This should suggest that, and maybe I’m just being crazy here, they deserve better than to be characterized as “The guys who never, ever pitch in for the pizza bill.” Arabic people have made and continue to make useful contributions, and to villify their entire culture based on the actions of a few extremists is ever so slightly pig-headed.
But, like I said, I could be wrong.
Oh, and about the whole corruption of power applying only to totalitarian-states-thing: depending on who you ask, America could very easily be seen as a Totalitarian state. Power is, after all, available in more capacities than just government. For example, one might equate sprawling corporations to Totalitarian systems. Imagine, a single company that accounts for almost all of America’s agricultural commerce on every level. Lets just call this “imaginary” monster ConAgra. Now lets pretend that this boogeyman controls virtually every company that is interested in buying Mr. Brown’s cattle - and therefore has complete control over how much it will pay him, regardless of whether it is enough to actually give Mr. Brown a profit, let alone enough to allow him to sustain his ranch, his home or his family. Lets also pretend that this beast does the same for chicken ranches, potato farms, etc. Now lets pretend that these products are then processed in plants fully operated by common workers with little or no education and from poor economic backgrounds, often in towns where the entire economy is based on the existence of said plants. It would be very difficult for these workers, with little understanding of their rights, and with the spectre of being fired, getting a pay-cut, or even the closing of the plant and the ensuing collapse of the town constantly flying over their heads, to in anyway protest their conditions. In such a situation, and especially in a capitalist system which operates simply on the notion that profit = success, it is rather difficult to believe that those few in charge of the behemoth, which in turns can effect so many lives, would not be corrupted by that power - especially when millions or even billions are to be made. Now, just for some zest, lets also pretend that there are multiple corporations such as these that operate in different fields, such as Oil, Steel, Finance, Retail, or any other such “industry,” and that these different corporations often overlap and even have many shared executives. Finally, lets pretend that these same executives, who already have almost absolute control over so many lives, are incestuous with politicians, giving enormous contributions to particular candidates, creating political organizations that wield unbelievable poloitical sway, and even often having politicians simultaneously serving as executives. Were all this a reality (thank goodness its “not”), it would not be difficult to see how it is a totalitarian state, one in which absolute power does, in fact, corrupt absolutely. It would also not be hard to see how an unrestricted “free enterprise” system can lead to exactly the opposite - just see Wal-Mart, ConAgra, Time-Warner, etc. When these business amalgams become so powerful as to be able to destroy all competition, one is once again left in a system that has little choice and that is heavily influenced by only a few people.
Damnit.
And one more thing - as far as fossil fuel lasting another 80 years, I agree with you. FUCK all future generations; fuck ‘em right in the ear. 80 years? Wow, thats one Kurt Vonnegut! That’s probably going to be about the time of my Grandkids, I estimate. Oh well, at least I had convenience. I mean, it’s not like I can do anything now, like, say, oh, I don’t know…begin researching cheaper, more effective, and replenishable fuels! It’s not like there are already people doing research on this with little to no funding or support, and it’s not like there are already hybrid cars that use about half the gas. I’ll make sure and steer clear of all that liberal-tree-hugging caca. After all, that has turned out so well in all past civilization vs. nature scenarios, like that town in Japan that had all the industrial poisons poured into its drinking/food supply, or for Chernobyl, or for all of London, which is covered in a lovely shade of soot. And out of curiosity, does this 80 year supply include Texas and Alaska? ‘Cuz, as a Texan (more specifically a Houstonian), I know I haven’t seen nearly enough petro-chemical complexes and oil refineries releasing God knows what into the air. And I can’t wait until all the attention the Middle East gets over its oil industry is focused on my home town! Yay! International malarkey for everyone! I can’t wait!
That out of the way, I would like to say that Mr. Vonnegut’s work is a personal favorite of mine, and if anyone knows how I could contact him, or if my tirades have perked your interest (or your wrath), please e-mail me.
rttam@hotmail.com
May you all die peacefully in your sleep, or possibly whilst having sex.
So far there are 10 entries on this thread (not including mine, which isn’t up yet). The only one I wasn’t sorry I wasted my time reading was the one citing A Brief History of Zero. Another illumination of another lie my teachers told me. I’m going to have to add McQuillin to my reading list.
The rest of you are full of shit. All typical misinformed half-truths and fallacies of logic. Educate yourselves. And hurry up about it. This world needs improving. We can start by improving ourselves.
I’m going to get back to doing my part.
Thanks, Anti, whoever you are, for providing the rare thrill of illumination.
I guess I’ll make a reccomendation.
A History of God by Karen Armstrong
ok, two.
Lies My Teacher Told Me: Everything Your American History Textbook Got Wrong by James W. Loewen
Ok, I feel a little guilty about saying you were all full of shit. I mean, you are full of shit, and so am I. That’s no reason to throw in the towel. You mean well, and so do I. Don’t take it too hard. Some of you have good ideas. I think the underlying message so far in this thread is that we all have a good deal of self-education to catch up on.
And zero is as good a place as any to start.
Re: http://www.inthesetimes.com/site/main/discuss/cold_turkey/
Agree with the statement by highlonesome (May 24, 2004): “Free will is the most basic and central Christian value”.
Mr. Kurt Vonnegut’s article: “Cold Turkey” (May 10, 2004), is a good introduction to the problem of evil, and hence a good segue to the esoteric Christian study of evil in our modern world.
Freedom implies making choices between good and evil. However, without the fall in the Garden of Eden (Genesis 2:16-17), man would never had the possibility of developing freedom (choosing between good and evil), and without freewill, there is no possibility of developing love, which was God’s ultimate goal for mankind.
You can only love someone, if you do it out of your freewill. God didn’t want a host of automatons (robots, androids, humanoids, zombies) obeying, worshiping, loving him. That’s not real love. Rather, he wanted us to obey, worship, and love him out of our own freedom and ability to think for ourselves (rationally, logically, etc.).
“We love him, because he first loved us.” (1 John 4:19)
“But God commendeth his love toward us, in that, while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us.” (Romans 5:8)
Continued recommended Christian esoteric studies:
http://steinerbooks.com/search/search.php?q=evil&x=60&y=2
http://www.steinerbooks.org/detail.html?id=1902636104
http://www.steinerbooks.org/detail.html?id=1855840464
http://www.steinerbooks.org/detail.html?id=0863152600
http://www.steinerbooks.org/detail.html?id=0904693945
http://www.steinerbooks.org/detail.html?id=0940262908
http://www.steinerbooks.org/detail.html?id=0877851476
http://www.steinerbooks.org/detail.html?id=188860221x
http://www.steinerbooks.org/detail.html?id=0877853991
http://www.steinerbooks.org/detail.html?id=1902636295
God (or whatever it is) bless Kurt Vonnegut.
Just a couple of notes:
Regardless of where zero came from, the numerals we use today are called Arabic numerals. And yes, I think the point was that Arabs have made significant positive contributions to humanity, even if another misguided Abrahamic religion isn’t one of them.
Anyone who thinks America can’t become a totalitarian state is a fool.
“If fascism came to America, it would be on a program of Americanism.”—Huey Long.
Take a hard look around; it’s happening now.
And for all the good that Jesus Christ tried to convey, Christianity has been his unfortunate legacy. Most of the horror humans have perpetrated against each other is rooted in someone believing he knew—beyond all doubt—what God wanted.
Cheers.
Amongst my favorite authors are Salinger, Voltaire, and yes, you Mr. Kurt Vonnegut. i love these authors because they offer me an intelligent, and realistic view of the world and the human state, which, in all it’s pessimism offers me a twisted ray of hope. hope that stems from knowing that i’m not the only one who feels, thinks and observes this world the way we do. Through all the valid points brought up in this article, i have to say i was a bit dissappointed (imagine a no name english major dissappointed in one of his favorite authors but regardless, when i saw this on a friends site, i was exited. as i read on though i got the impression of an intelligent but rage filled college kid who decided to vent his angers and frusterations on some internet post. it just seemed to lack any focus or point, and i guess it was sort of weird to see a hero who wrote novels of social commentary come out and spill his thoughts without the costume of metaphore. almost like Jimi Hendrix giving a speech on the politics in Vietanam, instead of playing MAchine Gun. if i can offer one thing that has always brought me out of the depression that comes from living in this world, and then realizing it, salingers “franny and zooey” Mr Vonnegut i thank you for your writings and yous spirit, and i wish you happiness and peace.
You’re an English major and you don’t know how to spell “exciting”?
You also open a parenthetical and never close it.
AND - while I’m sure it’s a stylistic “choice” (i.e. you’re aping e.e. cummings) - I hate it when people don’t capitalize their I’s. Especially people as self-important as you.
Softening your “criticism” with an “I love Vonnegut” qualification and some new age-y bullshit about wishing him happiness and peace doesn’t make you seem any less a complacent schmuck. Just a benevolent one.
Vonnegut may sound like “an intelligent but rage filled college kid who decided to vent his angers and frusterations [sic] on some internet post” but - in terms of fundamental mechanics and style, if nothing else - he’s got it all over you, sir.
American academia in action, ladies and gentlemen…
And we wonder why the President’s a moron…
drive less with your stupid,stinky and clumsy vehicles.
take back all your fucking assholesoldiers,nobody needs them.
draw and paint more!
painting curses for veterans and soldiers….or ikebana…or cooking…fuck your fastfood…
in German:Nimm Dir Zeit und nicht das Leben.
I enjoyed it.
Thank you.
I didn’t realize until now how sad and cynical Kurt Vonnegut was. His article has absolutely zero (<- another reference!) uplifting or positive comments on the human condition. I hope to avoid this particular “wisdom” as I approach 81.
Confuscius may have said “do unto others…” But here are some things Jesus said. They are not in the retaliatory sense that Confucius implies…
Joh 15:12 This is my commandment, That ye love one another, as I have loved you.
Mat 22:37 Jesus said unto him, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind.
Mat 22:38 This is the first and great commandment.
Mat 22:39 And the second is like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.
Mat 22:40 On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets.
I am sorry many of us “Christians” do not live like Jesus intended (especially me)...
I’ve never heard of Confucius’ teachings referred to as being in a “retaliatory sense.” Can you explain what you mean by that?
rage on o mighty warrior.
I just hope Mr. Vonnegut is not angry or bitter.
I’ll vouch for you, Kurt.
You’ve done much good.
And the world is still a beautiful place.
Who knows how this will end?
i too think Mel Gibson is a ridiculous fellow…
but he helped give us one of my favorite cinema lines of all time…
“The Lord tells me he can get me out of this situation… but He’s pretty sure you’re fucked!”
So little time so many wrongs to right. I for one am heartened to read the passionate resolve of a human being who has provided me with such dizzying hights and soul scraping mires with his astounding literary gift.
Thank you Mr Vonnegut. Thanks for everything.
GWA
On the subject of our planet, it is a beautiful place, that has to put up with the most misguided animals the planet has ever seen.
Take note of the below or as Kurt Vonnegut would say “LISTEN:”
1. Religion kills, so keep it between your God and yourself.
2. Patriotism kills, so dump it in the toilet.
3. There is only one reason why we are here, regardless of how we came about. We are here to help each other. Do not abuse the planet and all the animals that inhabit it. Once you have accomplished all this, then talk about your God. My guess is that your God will not be bothered with you spreading the word, as you have done what he expects from you… respect life!
Wake up each day and know that millions of people are suffering. Wake up and realise that you know nothing about them or their suffering and that you are not free, have no free will because you gave it to the tele. Switch on the tele and drown out the horror which you are so well at ignoring even though that horror goes against all that which is good about being human, which if you give some though to, will destroy you. But you choose to ignore that horror. It will destroy you anyway, because man is in essence a good creature and wants to do good.
And for you Americans ( I apologise for the extremely general term). You do not come from another planet. You are not any better than other nations. You are not special and your constitution was not inspired by Martian air balloons. It has its roots firmly embedded in European civilization. So stop the crap about American democracy or the first amendment . You have no rights. You gave them up when you were born. Now grow up and be of use!
Probably foremost, the lack of hierarchy in the Native societies in the eastern United States attracted the admiration of European observers. Frontiersmen were taken with the extent to which Native Americans enjoyed freedom as individuals. Women were also accorded more status and power in most Native societies than in white societies of the time, which white women noted with envy in captivity narratives. Although leadership was substantially hereditary in some nations, most Indian societies north of Mexico were much more democratic than Spain, France, or even England in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries. ...
We have seen how Native ideas of libery, fraternity, and equality found their way to Europe to influence social philosophers such as Thomas More, Locke, Montaigne, Montesquieu, and Rousseau. These European thinkers then influenced Americans such as Franklin, Jefferson, and Madison. In recent years historians have debated whether Indian ideas may also have influenced our democracy more directly. Through 150 years of colonial contact, the Iroquois League stood before the colonies as an object lesson in how to govern a large domain democratically. ...
In the 1740s the Iroquois wearied of dealing with several often bickering English colonies and suggested that the colonies form a union similar to the league. In 1754 Benjamin Franklin, who had spent much time among the Iroquois observing their deliberations, pleaded with colonial leaders to consider the Albany Plan of Union. ...
The colonies rejected the plan. But it was a forerunner of the Articles of Confederation and the Constitution. ...
John Mohawk has argued that American Indians are directly or indirectly responsible for the public-meeting tradition, free speech, democracy, and “all those things which got attatched to the Bill of Rights.” Without the Native example, “do you really believe that all those ideas would have found birth among a people who had spent a millennium butchering other people because of intolerance of questions of religion?” Mohawk may have overstated the case for Native democracy, since heredity played a major role in office-holding in many Indian societies. His case is strengthened, however, by the fact that wherever Europeans went into the Americas, they projected monarchs (“King Phillip”) or other undemocratic leaders onto native societies. To some degree, this projecting was done out of European self-interest, so they could claim to have purchased tribal land as a result of dealing with one person or faction. The practice also betrayed European thought: Europeans could not believe that nations did not have such rulers, since that was the only form of government they knew.
For a hundred years after our Revolution, Americans credited Native Americans as a source of their democratic institutions.
—excerpts from the chapter titled, “Red Eyes,” from “Lies My Teacher Told Me, Everything Your American History Textbook Got Wrong” by James W. Loewen
A couple of decades ago, a company called Mayfair published a dark superhero game called “Underground”, the only rpg which actively advocated the overthrow of the American government, albiet a dystopic version that had had the likes of Rush Limbaugh as President. One of the accessories that came with the game was a pad of “Free Speech” applications. The idea beign that your character was to use these to submit proposed Free Speech for approval.
Now as I write this and the Democratic Convention in Boston is winding down, the most memorable artifact to me was the creation of what has been dubbed the “Free Speech Containment Zone”
Have we become accepting enough of fascism that it no longer needs the pretense of being different?
“Have we become accepting enough of fascism that it no longer needs the pretense of being different?”
Yes.
Folks, the only essential difference between America c. 2004 and Germany c. 1939 is the that the Germans had way better looking uniforms.
“There is only one reason why we are here, regardless of how we came about. We are here to help each other.”
Actually, I think the only reason we are here is to have sex and make more of us. Sure, that’s a lame raison d’etre, but there it is.
“On the subject of our planet, it is a beautiful place…”
Let’s see, you live on a planet the conditions of which you are uniquely adapted to survive in. You are just tolerant enough to UV that it doesn’t kill you instantly. You are adapted to breathe just the air that is present. You are adapted to drink water which appears in abundance. You are adapted to eat and process other living creatures, which, in turn, are adapted to eat you. I guess you would consider it “beautiful.”
But then, a pile of shit is probably a beautiful world to fecal coliforms.
To Hunter Moon.
Go to a little country called Laos. Mothers sell their young daughters for USD 10. If you have children, how does that make you feel?
Try to avoid eastern countries though. Fucking young little girls is such fun! Go to India. Whole families are born into debt. Their kids have to work for years to pay off family debt. If you have no kids, forget it. Go on fucking like crazy.
The planet is beautiful, but of course if you have a better suggestion or have grand schemes to re-invent the eco system, let the world know.
Try not to obliterate this one though.
About the ‘games’ that we are born in to. As humans we tend toward extremes to define our selves, then try to label others with our label, or the “evil” opposite.
Jesus told us to ‘love our neighbor’ then told a story to show that anyone in need is our neighbor. He also said ‘Blessed are the Peace makers.’
Both of those statements ask us to be the fulcrum between the extremes. To reach out in all directions to bring balance.
Let’s do it! Let’s work for Peace and understanding between the extremes.
Dear Kurt,
Thanks for writing something again. I missed you. Kilgore Trout said “Life is something I wouldn’t wish on an animal.” If this is your E=mc2 then you are the Einstein of the Age of Anxiety.
Your article was published in a tiny newpaper. I gave it to my wife. She read it and quickly moved on to the other articles about shamanism, now pronounced “Shahhhhhmanism” to separate it from the “Shaymanism” we learned in our Anthropology careers and other subjects which I now refer as “booga-booga” ideas. That is not an original expression. I stole it from our older son, who is now in heaven, because as a cross between the blackest of Africans and the whitest of Germans, he had great disdain for black people who ran naked through jungles. To him they were “booga-booga” and had weird ideas of which he wanted no part given that white people build bridges, dams and nuclear weapons and black people in jungles just roll their eyes and throw spears. Our son hated being black, something we tried to undo in a hundred ways, but we were defeated by the incredible power of our culture’s lack of empathy.
The little newspaper is so chock full of booga-booga that it is really a kind of boring pornography, just the kind of place where Kilgore Trout loved to publish. This version of pornography has titles like “How the Mind can Defeat Time”, “Genetic Reconstruction of Your Beliefs”, “Understanding Your Child Through Astrology” and so on. You have finally become Kilgore.
My wife has now spoken in defense of this magazine. She believes that a positive attitude and belief in various kinds of magic will spread from person to person and make the world a better place. I suppose it all depends on where the truth resides and I don’t see humanity doing any better than it has done before, which is been nasty, back-stabbing, greedy and plug ugly in a thousand more ways. By the way, the term “plug ugly” comes your very own adopted city of New York when during the mid 1800’s each gang was associated with a private firehouse. While a home burned, one of the gang would sit on the fire plug taking dibs until their horse drawn fire gizmo arrived and then you, the helpless owner, had to negotiate a price with the rest of the gang while your house burned down. Nice people. Maybe everyone should have joined hands and prayed for the fire to go out.
Booga-booga.
You referred to Jesus Christ in you article. This reference always irks me, perhaps because of my Jewishness. Contrary to popular belief, “Christ” wasn’t his last name. Of course “Christ” means “messiah” I never use it.
Regardless, the world today would have made him weep.
I am leaving for Peru soon. The Incas, by the way, got high on human sacrifice. The Aztecs took the cake. Approximately 20,000 people per year were sacrificed by the Aztec royalty. Captives were taken to the top of pyramids where their hearts were ripped out. Then the bodies were tossed down the steps. Nice people, these noble savages. But there was protein to be had. Montezuma himself was reported to have been partial to cooked human thighs served with tomatoes and chili pepper sauce.
Jesus wept. Booga-booga.
I recall that perhaps you went through Transcendental Meditation training back around 1970. I believe that one of the characters in “Breakfast of Champions”, Duane Hoover’s son Bunny, was a practitioner. Duane had bad chemicals and smashed his boy’s face into a piano keyboard.
That little, squeaky voiced Maharishi was very popular. He came on Johnny Carson quite often, perhaps even more than Tiny Tim. Remember how we got initiated? We brought flowers, a piece of fruit and a handkerchief and in turn, after much booga-boogaing, we were given our mantras. I still remember mine and the strict warning I was given about ever saying it out loud. The TM people finally discredited themselves by claiming that they could fly. I saw an early video tape of this and all they did was bounce around on big pillows like frogs on a hot plate.
“Ah-ING-gah” was my mantra. It isn’t that this word hasn’t been useful. Sometimes I start it rotating in my head and it gets going by itself and then I can go to sleep. But I can also go to sleep without it. I had hopes of reaching Pure Consciousness back in those days but now I think that even if everyone could the world would just turn into a big India with people defecating in the streets and starving while letting cows eat their vegetables.
May you be blessed, kept and lonesome no more,
S. Michael Florian
Is it me?
Or are the vast majority of people who post on this site a bunch of inarticulate, ideologically demented, stark-raving lunatics!?!
I’m not sure if this speaks ill of Vonnegut’s readership or the subscription base of inthesetimes.com
Regardless, I’m truly frightened by the notion that so many of you are REAL people, who are actually ALIVE out there and… well, we can hardly call it “thinking”... but BELIEVING what you write here.
I’m not a big proponent of mood altering medications, but if you people aren’t (unsuccessfully) attempting satire in these posts, you may want to look into it…
It’s you.
Whew! What a relief!
Are you sure, though? Really?
By the way, that last post was far more coherent and balanced than your previous one. So I’ll at least say that I’m not so worried about YOU anymore.
As for the others… Well… You said it best.
Booga-booga!
S. Michael, Anti, just remember:
South Korea’s got Seoul
North Dakota likes it on top
Jersey girls aren’t trash (trash gets picked up)
New Mexico is cleaner than regular Mexico
and
Without Me, it’s just “Aweso”
Grumble.
To Watson:
“Go to a little country called Laos. Mothers sell their young daughters for USD 10. If you have children, how does that make you feel?
Try to avoid eastern countries though. Fucking young little girls is such fun! Go to India. Whole families are born into debt. Their kids have to work for years to pay off family debt. If you have no kids, forget it. Go on fucking like crazy.”
Do you really think you need to go half way around the world to find this? Just a year or so ago in Middletown, Ohio a mother sold her daughter for a pack of cigarettes.
Catholic priests right here in the good old West boff kids every day and have been doing it for centuries, apparently, not to mention all the other degenerates who have sex with children.
My point was more straight-forward, though. I was saying that the only real reason we are here is to make more of us. The same is true of dogs, cats, and ants. Everything else is just a side effect, but not a reason.
No reason whatsoever, eh? I can’t believe I’m entertaining this, but I am always tempted to pick the brain of one who refuses to acknowledge the existence or even the possibility of anything divine, and does so with such an absolute, authoritative tone. Also I accidentally clicked the unsubscribe link, and now I need to post something more to get back on the notification list. (I take back what I said before about being sorry I read your entries, you nuts. We should never regret reading, even if it’s jibba jabba. It’s a battle of principles and impulses.)
So, WHY do we need to make more of us?
Before you reply, consider what I’m asking. Don’t just tell me we’re hardwired for survival. I’m asking you WHY we are.
Now I can receive more notifications of posts from frutcakes. Goody. Mmmm….fruuuitcaaaake….
Vonnegut like all atheists is ultimately reduced to thinking of human beings as a mass of nerve fibers and protoplasm and of human consciousness as electrochemical static accidentally created by brain cells. This describes his wife (wives?) and children to I assume? A gospel of dirt as Thomas Carlyle wrote.
The Passion of the Christ is a better Hollywood movie then most. Certainly better then the kind Mr. Vonnegut gets paid for.
He obviously doesn’t know anything about conservatism as practiced by G.K. Chesterton, C.S. Lewis and other authentic conservatives instead mouthing the predictable litany of milksop parlor room liberalism he’s known for.
Mr. Vonnegut is honest enough to note the disjunction between his Maoist convictions and what he acknowledges as “great literature” (we know what happens to great literature when Maoists are in charge along with religion).
So which is true the best that has been thought and said in the world and therefore the history of the human spirit or Mr. Vonnegut?
The Passion of Christ is another Hollywood film created to get the masses into the cinema. It is another fantastic example of what lengths greedy people will go to, to show a film. People who go and watch the film come out of the cinema’s crying. They are literally touched by the anguish and betrayal that Jesus suffered.
Well what about almost half the worlds population which lives on less than 2 bucks a day people? What about the prostitutes that get sold from one establishment to another. Slaves for the rest of their lives if AIDS does not take them before.
Do you honestly believe that these people do not suffer and more so physically than Jesus? We will go to the cinema and be devastated by the Passion of Christ, but we do not even blink an eye or take a moment to consider the suffering which is all around us now at this very moment and not over 2000 years ago.
We are all so full of selective morality it is sickening.
Hold a minutes silence for Sept 11 and the few thousand people that died. Do not even shed a moments thought for the 800,000 and more people that were killed in Rwanda in 100 days. Or the earth quake that killed 5 times the amount of people than Sept 11 just a couple of months back, mmm must be something wrong as I can not remember where.
This is your planet and the people that inhabit it are your people.
Stop being so awfully American. You of all nations have the power and the possibility to do good. Now do it, because until now you have supported a government which has invaded numerous countries and killed (can we say millions yet?). You are also the only country which have use a nuclear bomb against another country. Is this statement wrong?
As one great man says. “SHAME ON YOU”
Thank God for Mr. Moore
ps. And for the boys and girls (Anti, Florian etc) I apologise for breaking your crayons. Must be my education and not paying attention in English classes
Dear “A Conservative” :
“So which is true the best that has been thought and said in the world and therefore the history of the human spirit or Mr. Vonnegut?”
If you are using Mr. Vonnegut in reference of atheism, and therefore practically every scientist since the decline of Christian censorship, then I will have to go with Vonnegut.
But I’ll get back to that in a minute.
Simply because Vonnegut does not adhere to the “conservatism” of C.S. Lewis, G. K. Chesterton, ad nauseum, does not make him unaware of it. We atheists, unlike theists, are not afraid of other ideologies simply because they challenge our own. In fact, atheism (which is not an ideology at all, but rather a conclusion that is supported by such things as “science” and “logic,” the kinds of things most churches dismiss as poppycock) is based largely on disagreement and argument. Using such crazy things as “Dialogue,” we try to discern the truth by reason, rather than committing to a strict set of rules that, although handed down from divinity, change every couple of decades.
You want to see what I am talking about? mrandmrsjohnqsmith and A Conservative both serve good examples - mrandmrs(...) continuously calls everyone here nuts and fruitcakes, as wall as referring to all ideas differing from his(hers) as “jibba jabba.” All this of course, without any substantiation as to why it is, or even which arguments are “jibba jabba,” and without advancing any new argument (a question is not an argument).
Meanwhile, A Conservative (with a name that says it all - you apparently need to identify yourself with a certain set of ideas so badly that you automatically label yourself as such) dismisses Vonnegut’s (as well as everyone else’s) arguments as a “predictable litany of milksop parlor liberalism.” Just a personal insight: arguments that hinge on identifying something as liberal or conservative, and therefore evil or good, rarely have any actual merit. Labeling arguments as such is the same as calling a chair a chair - it is not positive or negative, it is simply a name. The only weight this kind of argument has is in appealing to pre-concieved biases, i.e. “it’s conservative, I’m liberal, therefore I don’t like it.” Historically, doing such is terribly Christian in nature; for example, labeling all non-christian religions as “witchcraft”, and using that as justification for burning hundreds of thousands of innocents, or the same set-up, only this time labeling them as “heretics,” etc, etc, etc.
Many theists claim the very same argument already made on this postboard - that atheists simply refuse to accept the existence of a divine being. This is another characteristic of most Christians, the immediate assumption that they are correct and everyone else must be wrong. If one is unwilling to accept even the slight possibility, no matter how miniscule of a chance there is, that one is wrong, then there can be no valid argument, only one person repeatedly accusing the other of not listening, while doing the exact same thing. This is reminiscient of my childhood arguments with my brothers - “yes, no, yes, no, yes, no, uh-huh, uh-uh, yeah-ha, nuh-uh”, and on and on. This isn’t “arguing,” it is restating your thesis over and over again.
The point is this: I am willing to accept that I may be wrong (on any level, spiritual, political, Simpson’s Trivia, or whatever else), but I demand actual evidence of such - keep in mind that faith is not evidence. In fact, faith, by definition, is belief without facts. If you choose to believe something “just because,” that’s fine with me, just don’t use a condescending attitude with othrs who don’t.
Oh, and Jesus may be Love, but God is rather violent:
“Behold, I will corrupt your seed and spread dung upon your faces…” Malachi 2:3
“I will strew your flesh upon the mountains, and fill the valleys with your carcass. I will drench the land even to the mountains with your flowing blood…” Ezekiel 32:5
(Oop, I forgot, this is the Old Testament God - before his random mood alteration.)
To HanktheHobo,
Thanks for that. I so dearly wanted to say just that to the moron but lack the eloquence and insight.
To Mr. Conservative,
Sorry for calling you a moron. Change your ideas about the world and its inhabitants. Try and respect all cultures and peoples and their religions of which some are older than the Bible.
“Practically every scientist?” Check your sources. A quick Google search will do for starters, if you can’t put down your sci-fi long enough to stomach some non-fiction. At the very least you should find several links to the Reuters story on the survey from 1996. It was only a poll of U.S. scientists, but being a Texan, you can find that relevant. It found 39% believed in a personal God and another 15% were agnostic. Presumably a world survey would be a far more weighty undertaking. Actually accessing and polling a valid cross-section of the world’s scientific population alone would be a mammoth task. That doesn’t even begin to address the need for a more diverse questionnaire than the one in the Reuters report which was clearly a mere study of western monotheism.
And that’s “anything divine,” if you care to read as far back as three posts, not “divine being.” Try to transcend enough to see clearly why don’t you.
Your tone seems to carry a claim to some sort of high ground and gives us readers the impression that it will lift this thread out of the mire of blathered stream-of-consciousness rants with your “dialog” and “reason,” and into some sort of enlightened forum, but you do no such thing. You instead add yet another rant with no real direction aside from the high of seeing one’s thoughts asserted in an authoritative tone on a website for all to see. By reading your post, one might be fooled into deducing that atheists invented logic, reason and dialog, and have a corner on the market of science and free thinking. “Most churches?” I think you haven’t really done your homework. You are as guilty of spewing half-truths without backing them up as anyone else on this thread, and much more so than many.
Opinions are like assholes, Hank, everyone’s got one. You are a nutty fruitcake, get used to it. Things could be worse. Even if you agreed with me 100%, I’d still say you were a nut. Everyone’s crazy, it’s part of being human. The people who refuse to admit their insanity are the ones who go postal. Admit your are full of shit like the rest of us, Hank, before it’s too late.
Want a dialog? Here’s a question: Please tell us all what you meant by the expression, “that encouragable lil’ fella, Zero.” How exactly has zero been “encouraged,” please tell us all?
I hate to do this to you in front of a crowd and all, but you chose to make an example out of me. You singled me out and misquoted me. You clearly have mistaken me for someone else, pardner.
Now I’ll spend my precious time giving you an example of how you are unequivocally wrong, and not just a lousy speller:
“...depending on who you ask, America could very easily be seen as a Totalitarian state. Power is, after all, available in more capacities than just government.”
Sure, if by “depending on who you ask,” you mean “whether or not you ask someone who knows what a totalitarian state is.” Look up “totalitarian” in the dictionary. I’m not going to do your homework for you.
In support of your “argument” you forced us to sit through your imaginary sci-fi scenario of “a single company that accounts for almost all of America’s agricultural commerce on every level.” Then you talk a hole in our heads, and finally conclude with “Were all this a reality (thank goodness its “not”), it would not be difficult to see how it is a totalitarian state.” Well, thank goodness, it was all a dream!
What a formidable argument, Dorothy. You sure hacked that straw man to pieces.
Now, getting back to the real world, I just remembered that I have more important things to do than try to educate people who won’t bother to educate themselves. Until you have a valid argument, I will forgo wasting my valuable time forming a formidable retort.
Until that shining day…
Quitcho jibba jabba, FOO!
Oh, well, the English student thinks you’re “eloquent.” Scuse me. heh.
sounds like you are the one who is a confused, mrandmrsjohnqsmith. Tell us what you’re trying to prove, oh learned and enlightened one.
I saw nowhere earlier where hank attacked you, or maybe it was you calling the other posters full of shit that got his started? There’s other ways to make your point.
Now you’re trying to make up for it by calling yourself crazy as well.
Go troll somewhere else.
I think I’m going to go take a steaming mrandmrsjohnqsmith and use some Texas to wipe with before flushing.
Do a quick google search of what? This seems like a pretty open field, perhaps you could narrow that search down for me - perhaps an actual name of the survey or the year, or any other useful information (I’m not being sarcastic, I really am interested in seeing that). I have no reason to think you would lie about it, so we’ll go with it; the fault was mine. By saying all scientists, what I meant was the work done by scientists, a.k.a. modern science. The fact that so many pioneers in the fields that have, more than any others, advanced the idea of atheism are themselves theists is an interesting study in sociology and psychology. This is a good example of human beings’ need to have a metaphysical solution, a catch-all net that makes everything ok. We all fear death, so much that even a person who researches logic and tests laws of nature will rationalize a supernatural existence. Unfortunately, such an existence is impossible to prove by science - by its very nature, it is outside of natural laws, and therefore outside the realm of tests and observations. In other words, even though the scientists may convince themeselves of such an existence, they will also be the first to say that they can’t prove it.
This is also excluding the fact that polls and surveys are insanely inaccurate; there is no way of knowing if the population polled is an accurate representation of the entire research population (in this case, scientists in America), or if the subjects answer truthfully. It also depends on how the survey is done - is it interview, telephone, or perhaps mail? In any case, all have their own individual shortcomings. Regardless, surveys themselves offer only a rough starting point for research, and are certainly not used for absolute numbers or conclusions.
“Divine - of the nature of, proceeding from, or pertinent to God; sacred” (The New American Webster Dictionary, 1972)
“Anything divine” would inherently need a god to exist; thus, if there are no gods, there cannot be “anything divine,” pardner.
And what exactly am I transcending? There has to be something to transcend, I cannot simply “go beyond,” unless there is something specified for me to transcend.
“Your tone seems to carry a claim to some sort of high ground and gives us readers the impression that it will lift this thread out of the mire of blathered stream-of-consciousness rants with your “dialog” and “reason,” and into some sort of enlightened forum, but you do no such thing.”
“Stream of consciousness - The total range of awareness and emotive-response of an individual, from the lowest pre-speech level to the highest fully articulated level of rational thought. The assumption is that in the mind of an individual at a given moment a stream of consciousness is a mixture of all the levels of awareness, an unending flow of sensations, thoughts, memories, associations, and reflections;...” (A Handbook to Literature, 7th ed., 1996)
I fail to see where that fits in to any prior posts here; I may just be another slow country boy, but at least I try to stick with terms I know. I also don’t claim to take the high ground, unless by that you mean that I refrain from littering my arguments with name-calling. I could end every sentence with ass-clown, but I won’t. And I don’t know exactly how directionless my “rant” is; to me, a directionless rant is more like calling everyone else crazy and then giving no reason why, or even offering any kind of real idea. As far as using an authoritative tone, perhaps you are referring to my confidence. Obviously I think I am right, or else I wouldn’t bother to present my thoughts. The difference between my “authoritative tone” and yours is that I have avoided using such condescending techniques as insults, and that I am willing to listen to other points of view.
I have merely pointed out that atheists utilize logic and dialogue, not faith. I wasn’t aware that saying a person uses or relies on something automatically suggests that they also invented it. I don’t believe the Japanese invented cars, although they use and build many of them, and I don’t believe that police invented guns, jails, or walkie-talkies. Perhaps you simply misunderstood the argument, but I don’t know where I say that we(atheists) invented any of those tools.
How much more backing up do you want, this is a post-board.
Opinions are like assholes, how original.
You’re absolutely right - sort of. I did use the wrong word, although I didn’t actually spell it wrong. Encouragable is spelled correctly, it just isn’t the right word; what I meant was incorrigible, which is what we call a homonym, in which two words sound similar and are often (but not always) spelled the same, but have different meanings. So congratulations, I suppose incorrectly using a word totally destroys my argument, especially as it was not in a vital point of said argument. Wow, you really showed me. Well, I spelled that word right, but here are a few I didn’t: “othrs” and “poloitical,” as memory serves. Oh, no, it seems that even you are capable of occasionally committing this mortal sin, Mr. Frutcakes.
Every time I make a post, I sit back and wait for some diligent reader to point out the incorrect spellings and therefore invalidate my argument, so thank you very much.
By the way, zero can be encouragable in the same way that it can be incorrigible, through the magic of personification.
“I hate to do this to you in front of a crowd and all, but you chose to make an example out of me. You singled me out and misquoted me. You clearly have mistaken me for someone else, pardner.”
It’s pretty obvious to anyone that you quite enjoyed singling me out. However, I never singled you out - the fact that I mentioned others besides yourself makes that technically impossible, as you are no longer “single.”
I suppose taking a cheap shot at Texas culture makes your argument more poignant, but it doesn’t make it more valid. I only mentioned my home state to establish my proximity to the largest petrochemical complex in the country, and therefore my direct concern in the expanding of that already cumbersome complex.
“totalitarian - pertaining to a governemnt that suppresses opposition” (New Am. Web. Dic., 1972)
Hmmm, so by illustrating that major corporations control important government decisions through large grants, campaign funds, political sway, lobbying, and the manipulation of business ties (such as former or current executive officers) as well as the “Good Old Boy” network (this would include shooting down possible bills in Congress and in other political arenas, which in American democracy is the only true form of “opposition” we have, that would go against the well-being of those corporations), I haven’t proven anything? Not even enough shadow of a doubt to prevent you from declaring my argument “unequivocally” wrong? I didn’t make an absolute statement:
“...depending on who you ask, America could very easily be seen as a Totalitarian state. Power is, after all, available in more capacities than just government.”
The use of such apologetic words as “depending on” and “easily seen as” make the statement “unequivocally” equivocal. You cannot prove beyond any uncertainty that something cannot be seen as something else, therefore it is uncertain and ambiguous, left out for debate, not for an absolute, irrefutable truth. This is part of what we call a dialogue.
I am aware that the corporations themselves are not governments, and therefore cannot be a “totalitarian state;” the obvious, at least I thought obvious, connection is that these companies’ power in government causes the government itself to often behave in a fashion similar to a totalitarian state. This is only one example that I chose; I could also go into detail about COINTELPRO, in which the American government used its branches to investigate potentially innocent US citizens, and often take “counter” action against them, based on little more than their political affiliation.
I wouldn’t let you do my homework, so don’t worry - I like passing.
ConAgra and its percentage of the agricultural market is not “sci-fi,” its fact, or as you call it, the “real world.”
When you say I talk a hole in your head, this large amount of text, often in paragraph form and containing many words forming coherent sentences, is what we call “an argument.” With all the belly-aching you do about half-truths and no support, one would think you could do a better job of spotting supporting statements.
“What a formidable argument, Dorothy. You sure hacked that straw man to pieces.”
Like I said, a condescending attitude which tries to hide a complete lack of any substantial counter-argument. Just pish-posh intended to make others feel smaller than you. Very impressive, indeed.
Apparently, your “education” consists of reading “Lies My Teacher Told Me.” Congratulations, you read a book. There are a lot more out there, just waiting for you.
I’ll leave you with these wise words from my youth:
Take a look
Its in a book
Reading Rainbow
My mistake, you most certainly did give a year on the survey. My apologies.
When I started reading this thread it looked a promising one. Triggered by a piece of work from an old master, intelligent conversation, informative posts, acknowledgements and so on.
How is it though, that now that I’ve read through to the end of it, I fear the responses this post is going to get and I just can’t stand getting criticized on my spelling and vocabulary, punctuation and capitalization, style. Boohoo.
One KV character, a one time instructor in the army, has learned that using curse words gives people an excuse to ignore or dismiss your whole argument.
I think that’s brilliant, though of course, not using curse words is easier sometimes than speling corectly and expressing yourself eloquently.
To me it shows how we will resist change based on format alone. Form over function, the cover, not the book. We don’t even need to hear the message. We can just dismiss it outright if there is the least little thing we don’t like about it. The result of information overload.
And what is this unstopable urge to resist change?
About spelling: In fcat I raed an atrcile wihch calmis taht you can ietnrpert jmubeld wdros as lnog as the fsrit and lsat lteters are in palce.
So much for correct spelling.
I’m saying… in case you hadn’t noticed… let’s not fuss over details. We’ll get to those when it is time for implementation of the plan(?).
Broad strokes and general direction.
Why do conversations in threads like these become sooo personal soo often and why do arguments turn into conflicts where one has to attack and/or/to defend?
Insecurity, paranoia, over-sensitivity? The human condition. Our fragile ego’s.
That most narrow-minded faculty of our consciousness built for the sole purpose of focused interaction with the world, not for governing our lives. It is not equipped for this task. No wonder.
If you don’t like someone’s idea, culture, religion, color or whathaveyou, you don’t need to try and kill it. If you cannot bring a positive contribution - and these can include constructive criticism - then do not contribute at all, there are other areas where your energy might be more positively expressed. Live and let live and, as has been said before, help others where you can.
Needless to say (but then, so is most of this post, right), I’m a big fan of KV. His work has been quite a factor in shaping my life. He showed me that Santa Clause wasn’t real.
Unlike him perhaps, I remain hopeful and optimistic about our future. I think we should be all right, once we get past these things that cause us to start fighting on an internet messageboard, or in a desert in Iraque or wherever the hell else we can find some space to beat each other up. And there are waves in motion to help us see ways of doing just that. I think TM for instance, could actually be a contributing factor here.
Broaden our minds. For it is pettiness that we need to get past. How hard can that be? Who wants to be petty? Just let go.
Ah yes, but we are kept petty and small by the powers that be. Be they church or government or science or media. We are not encouraged to think beyond accepted parameters. So all we’d have to do is not accept the parameters. It is dangerous to venture out from under their wing. How else will we learn to fly. Our imaginations, fed by violence and rehashes of familiar themes, become limited too. Use media to shape imagination and we eat it all up. Supply and demand. Come on.
We respond to stimuli like pavlovian dogs. Financial insentive, punishment by law. I say again: Come on.
We are multi-dimensional beings, man. Give us food for dreams to make us soar high above the plains of pettiness where now we dwell. The great beyond within. People can fly.
We should stop accepting what they feed us. The parameters will change. Demand and supply.
We all enjoy or suffer the human condition. We change what we can and the rest, we learn to live with.
So I, being human like you, am in no position to judge you. Hell I don’t even know you. Let he who is without sin cast the first stone.
Not quite coherent, but enough to get the message across and at the same time cause your brain to deviate from regular patterns. This is to be encouraged.
Please don’t hate me for what I wrote, I couldn’t bear it. I didn’t mean to hurt you. I’m sorry if I did. And so on.
Have fun,
Alex
Hi,
I’m so happy that mr. Vonnegut is still out there with his sharp comments about the world - and the U.S. (hey, Europe is still out there - and a few other continents - just in case anybody have forgot…).
A lot of people in Europe share a lot of mr. Vonnegut’s views on the world today. I do. And like me I’m sure we’re many becoming more and more sad about the state of things - both in the world and in the U.S.
Oh, keep on for some more years mr. Vonnegut, please!
Good health.
Ting-a-ling!
Well, shame on you, Hank, for using “logic” and “dialogue” in your ranting! Don’t you know that automatically identifies you as a Marxist! Yes, that’s right a communist, something we Americans were all brought up to abhor. Especially when arguing with conservative Christians, the REAL Americans that would never question the spiritual and intellectual authority of their government, community or family. Geez!
The truth is, people, that there’s only one truth: the one, true history of the universe. Unfortunately, none of us are old enough to remember it all. Theism vs. atheism? Pshaw. Red Sox vs. Yankees is more interesting. Yes, corporate monopolies are ruining the fun for a lot of people who never had any say in whether capitalism would be THE system for the U.S.A., but that doesn’t mean that you can’t have any fun. Life is as beautiful as you want it to be, or as horrible as you want. You just have to remember that the stuff that fills your head was put there by another batch of humans that also didn’t know their asses from their elbows. To identify so strongly with what you believe is what causes people to kill each other. And as much as people talk about not wanting that, it doesn’t seem to have stopped war or terrorism or name-calling, or even slowed it down any. Kurt was mentioning Jesus to point out the hypocrisy of this mostly Christian nation advocating very non-Christian doctrine. Anybody that doesn’t see that is simply not paying attention. You don’t even need to know that much about the guy.
My advice to all that read these posts - stop and smell the roses! Adieu!
Some interesting ideas have been put forth here.
I agree completely; dismissing an argument due to only mechanical errors such as incorrect spelling and word choice is rather ludicrous. Although I may have gone slightly overboard, my intentions in pointing out technical errors was to show that we all make plenty of errors. After all, this is a post board, not a professional paper. My entire point was that lingering on such mistakes is assinine and completely opposite progress, although after reading the prior posts I feel a bit sheepish. It is quite easy to let a bruised ego get in the way of common sense.
As fa as sitting back and smelling the roses - I couldn’t agree more. I won’t go into great detail, but I do my best to enjoy and appreciate the smaller things in life for what they are. However, I could not, in good conscience, merely sit back for the rest of my life and ignore great injustices I see all around me, injustices that cause others less fortunate to be unable to smell the roses themselves. I’m sure that even the most wretched existence provides short periods of personal reflection and satisfaction for nothing more than being alive. Spending the other 80 or 90 percent of your life in absolute misery, though, is a terrible thing to accept. This is why I devote much of my time to attempting to find something better, something that can help everything. This may be a fairy-tale goal, but I really don’t have anything better to do - get a job as a music producer, plant a garden, build a model boat in a bottle, it all is equally useless. In my view, and I may be wrong, we’re here for a while, then we go away. Writing a poem, playing a video game, or going to church all seem to be equally pointless in that they will all eventually come to nothing. It is this reasoning that has led me to my present conclusion:
Life is short, hard, and often a big let-down, as well as being utterly pointless in the long-run.
I don’t like seeing people suffer, or even knowing that they are.
Therefore, while trying to enjoy my own life, I will also dedicate it to trying to find ways to improve others’ (as well as my own).
This isn’t some kind of selfless act - actually, it’s compltely selfish. By helping others, I get a sense of satisfaction, knowing that I “made a difference,” whatever that means.
I would like to hear any reactions to these ideas.
It’s interesting that the internet can become such a bitter place, where people say things to each other that would never be said face-to-face.
Anyway. People have resented America’s actions in the world before GWB’s presidency, but by an large most people were glad that the USA won the Cold War, not the Soviet Union (and by and large, still are). However, GWB’s administration have shown zero interest in foreign opinion, and have incurred a powerless sense of anger towards the current US government. Sure, France, Germany and Russia’s protestation of the Iraq war smacked of diplomatic wrangling, too, possibly due to alleged business contacts with the Hussein government. Yet the war was fought without a clear exit strategy and on faulty reasoning. (Al-Quaeda in Iraq? America has had more links with Bin Laden than Iraq, since Bin Laden worked for the CIA in Afghanistan before he blew things up for a living. WMDs? Nope.) There are positive things to say for the war (Hussein was pretty evil), but by and large the US military and administration seem to have entered the war prematurely and without a clear strategy. And now they’re backed into the corner of bombing a holy city, which will no doubt simply alienate them further from the Iraqi people. Maybe this was unavoidable (aside from not going to war, of course), but it’s a mess nonetheless.
I confess I probably know less about American domestic policy than the Americans here. Yet it seems odd that someone you would support as a President would turn a large surplus into a crippling debt, losing valuable public services as he goes. I guess, coming from a nation with a full welfare state, that Americans view public services differently, but even so, it seems wrong that the world’s most advanced nation has such poor health coverage, despite probably excellent facilities for those that do have it. Maybe that’s better than a service that people keep rubbishing but is free at the point of use; who knows?
A way out of the problems Bush is in? My own personal opinion: stop the tax cuts to the rich. They haven’t worked. Rebuild the economy (natch). Make a reasonable stab at returning order to Iraq, then leave, or replace the forces there with a more representative body, if the UN will play ball. Give the inmates of Guantanamo Bay trials ASAP; it’s doing America no good to have such a shady institution keeping foreign nationals in conditions that are billed to be atricious and which reporters haven’t been able to verify. Do something about Global Warming, etc; you’ll have to sooner or later, and the world will like you better for it if you start now. Plus, the Middle East won’t be so important if you don’t need their oil as much.
In long term, one lesson Britain has learnt is that you have to be very, very careful when using military force in other countries. Despite lofty ideals, most places you occupy will probably dislike you, and attempts to take advantage economically will cripple nations. I’m not saying that America has an empire anything as bad as Britain’s one, but it’s a lesson worth learning. Things like trying to view the inhabitants of the nation you’re in as people to be helped back on their feet as opposed to potential terrorists to a man help, difficult though it may be to patrol a street which could hide a militiaman carrying an RPG or rifle. It’s hard pleasing everyone when you’re the world’s only superpower, but GWB doesn’t seem to be trying to please anyone. As a Briton, I’m not particularly patriotic, and although support for our troops is taken as granted, it doesn’t extend into supporting our military ventures blindly, as I’ve seen some people do. The amount of criticism of our Prime Minister for partaking in the war with flawed reasons suggests that as a nation, we’re fairly critical of our actions in the world if they are perceived to be negative.
So it’s not all doom and gloom as you might read into Vonnegut’s writing, though granted, humans will probably wage wars, etc, for some time yet, but America is getting dangerously close to what Britain was 100 or 200 years ago, and it’s worth stepping back and looking at the direction you’re going in before embarking on a foreign policy such as GWB’s.
I hope you don’t mind me withholding my e-mail, but I tend to prefer not to plaster it about the net; it’s already clogging up with spam.
“As the Dalai Lama has said, if you are going to be selfish, at least be wisely selfish. What he means by this peculiar-sounding advice is that in a way bodhicitta is like a huge selfish attitude: when you dedicate yourself to others with loving-kindness, you get back far more happiness than you could experience otherwise.”
—Introduction to Tantra, A Vision of Totality by Lama Yeshe
“Wisely” was italicized, but I can’t reproduce that here. Anyway, It looks like you’re onto something.
I’m sorry for being insensitive. I forget not everyone is as thick-skinned as I am. As a token of my sincerity, I hereby proclaim to be mrandmrsjohnqsmith no more. From now on, I am Mr. Fruitcakes.
I like most of us ( if I may speak for some) are truly frustrated with life. When I was young life was great even if my childhood was below average. But when you are young, life’s worries and problems exist in another universe and boy what happened to that feeling.
In an earlier post it was mentioned that all should be allowed to speak their mind - I could not agree more. What really gets to me though, is when people start talking about religion or more specifically the Christian faith. Why can we not leave this out of the equation. Do we need to mention who we believe in as proof of our worth? Are we so insecure that we need to flash our badge of faith to strike fear into the hearts of infidels. Do we imagine our gods to be so insecure that they need personal marketing teams. We live on this planet and not the gods. Do I believe in any form of god. I do not know how to answer that question. I do know that what resides in my heart is a beautiful thing.
As another person mentioned earlier, we are so full of the misguided crap given to us from the folks who came before us. What chance do we stand of seeing clearly the way ahead. Most of us will spend the best part of our lives just trying to free ourselves from misguided truths, notions and things our parents told us in good faith, but are just simply wrong. How many will succeed. How many of us will succeed in not passing the same crap onto our kids. Speak about a vicious circle.
But to get back to that beautiful thing that is in our hearts, it has the ability to do immeasurable good. It has the power to change this world and the universe. Believe it. Its that simple. If it is God, Yahweh, Allah or Buddha who cares. Its there no matter what you want to call it.
Unfortunately the beauty that resides there is also the reason why we are stuck with the horror all around us. We are good and we need to do just that or else, well we know what else. Because we do not make use of this we are poisoning ourselves or slowly committing suicide. The saddest thing in this world is when the spirit gets knocked out of us. No more dreams just the same routine everyday. Drink another beer,
watch the TV. When will that bitch bring me my food. When will that pig die. And the little boys and girls if they are young hide the misery of their parents life’s deep inside hoping it will go away and so on.
“You might be finished with your past, but your past is not always finished with you” as the saying goes.
So the big question is, how do we correct all that we have done wrong to each other, the animals and our planet.
- Feel that beauty in your heart - Religion is between you and your God.
- We are all the same and if one of us is not free, none of us are free - Forget patriotism its over rated.
and so on. Thank you Mr.. Vonnegut. I hope your mighty sword strikes the fear of Dwayne’s bad chemicals into the beauty less hearts.
I apologise if I have offended anybody. This is not a pissing contest or a competition to see who’s better at the play of words. As Hank has said, its all pretty useless how you spend your day unless it is to help others in some way.
“almost anybody can learn to think
or believe
or know,
but not a single human being
can be taught to feel.
why?
because whenever you think
or you believe
or you know,
you are a lot of other people:
but the moment you feel
you are nobody but yourself.
to be nobody but yourself-
in a world which is doing its best
night and day
to make you everybody else-
means to fight the hardest battle
which any human being can fight:
and never stop fighting.”
e.e. cummings
Robert Anton Wilson said in a book that human beings are primates who cannot possibly conceive that anything could ever operate correctly without an Alpha Male, hence we dreamt up a flock of omnipotent deities.
I think we dreamt them up to justify things like coincidence, to help ourselves sleep at night when we commit grievous acts for which there are no reasonable/logical justifications, and the most horrendous of all situations, the suspension of skepticism, logic, and rationality.
Oh, and your everyday “2+2=5 because I believe in deities” claptrap.
The first Vonnegut book I have ever read was _Cat’s Cradle_ and I still get the most ominous of feelings when I think of what our politicians would do if/when given the type of power afforded to them with such a weapon as Ice-Nine.
Hey Mr. V
My name is Ethan and I admire you a lot. Honestly, I have only read one of your books (Slaughterhouse 5), and it was purty darn awesome. Cat’s Cradle is next on my list either for Christmas break or until after I get done with some Gandhi.
Anyway, although you yourself seem to have little hope, you inspire me. I plan on spending my life pushing some rocks that have not shown any indication of moving throughout all of human existence until I die. Not too fun but I believe it to be my path.
Thank you for your writing.
“What really gets to me though, is when people start talking about religion or more specifically the Christian faith. Why can we not leave this out of the equation. Do we need to mention who we believe in as proof of our worth? Are we so insecure that we need to flash our badge of faith to strike fear into the hearts of infidels. Do we imagine our gods to be so insecure that they need personal marketing teams.”
A little reminder. The reason you are reading this, and perhaps posting here, is because you clicked on a little link titled “discuss this topic.” The “topic” is a piece which mentions Jesus and Christianity quite frequently in its context. It’s irrational to ask everyone to leave it out of the equation. I respectfully submit that you may be in the wrong thread.
I read back through this thread to find the instances in which people flashed their badges of faith to strike fear into the hearts of infidels, because I couldn’t remember seeing any. Here’s the best I could come up with, in chronological order:
“Jesus was the first libertarian…”
Not exactly a fearsome statement, aside from the fact that the Libertarian Party seems poised to leap into the “third party” gap that’s forming due to The People’s lack of interest in the two ruling parties. Beware the Libertarian party. They want to do away with pollution control. Apparently, environmentally conscious regulation hinders one’s “freedom” to pollute our environment. Supposedly “the free market” will do all of our regulating for us, but if it’s cheaper to dump toxic waste into everyone’s water supply than to dispose of it properly, the polluters win in a free market. When you mix your baby’s formula with that water, it becomes clear that environmental laws are like murder laws. They’re there for a good reason.
But I digress. Next.
“The Romans, the Pharisees; they were the kingdom of man. WE are the kingdom of God.”
This statement is probably the prime suspect in the case of the fearsome badge flashing, and yet it is only so by one interpretation because the author leaves us guessing as to who WE is. (Who AM us, anyway?) At first I thought maybe We meant “all of us humans,” but later Christianity is mentioned in the post, so one could infer that WE = Christians. If so, then that’s pretty exlusive and derogatory. The “Romans and Pharisees” bit makes me think the author is coming from a specifically Bible story point of view.
“The most progressive of all the Jews of Palestine were the Pharisees, who found the solution of the Essenes too elitist. In the New Testament, the Parisees are depicted as whited sepulcres and blatant hypocrites. This is due to distortions of first-century polemic. The Pharisees were passionately spiritual Jews. ...They cultivated a sense of God’s presence in the smallest detail of daily life.
...The Gospels often show Jesus arguing with the Pharisees, but the discussion is either amicable or may reflect a disagreement with the more rigorous school of Shammai.”
from A History of God by Karen Armstrong
And as long as I’m going to the trouble to do this,
“Do you honestly believe that these people do not suffer and more so physically than Jesus? We will go to the cinema and be devastated by the Passion of Christ, but we do not even blink an eye or take a moment to consider the suffering which is all around us now at this very moment and not over 2000 years ago.”
Watson, what you might not understand is that it wasn’t Jesus’ “physical suffering” that “devastated” people. It’s who Jesus is to them. Even Vonnegut refers to him as “that greatest and most humane of human beings.” According to many of these people’s faiths, Jesus is more even than that. He is their god, and to many of them he is the son of their God, offered up as a sacrificial lamb, a gift to redeem the sinners of the world. They feel directly affected by this particular slaying, because they believe it was done for the purpose of washing their sins away and saving their souls from eternal damnation, though they feel they are not worthy of such a gift. Perhaps that gives you some insight into why those people weep.
But, sadly, as one poster so eloquently put it, “...for all the good that Jesus Christ tried to convey, Christianity has been his unfortunate legacy.”
Too true. The Inquisition, the Crusades, the witch hunts, Oral Roberts…
The Christian Church has had it’s moments, though. The American Civil Rights movement, for example. Most of the civil rights leaders, from Dr. King to Mrs. Fannie Lou Hamer not only were practicing Christians, but made their faith a cornerstone of their efforts. Their faith was where they gathered strength from, their God was what gave them the courage to stand when they faced attack dogs, armed state troopers with guns and clubs, fire departments that would use their life-saving hoses as weapons, and the deep south jail cells, eviction, joblessness, and lynch mobs they knew would be waiting for them when they returned home.
Got carried away, there.
But for those who wish to keep it scientific, matter is never created nor destroyed. Energy is never created nor destroyed, only changed. That means that every molecule, every atom in your body, your brains and your toe jam, have always existed throughout eternity, and always will exist. Personally I often find the idea of simply returning to dirt at death, that’s the end of it, to be pretty comforting. Some think it’s scary, I do too, sometimes, the idea of having my light switched out forever, my inability to fathom such a thing, bla bla. It actually sounds pretty nice, though. Painless, anyway. An end to suffering. In Buddha’s first sermon he laid dowm the concept that life is suffering. No, what’s really scary is the alternative to a finite death. What if there really IS an afterlife?
But getting back to science…
A Physicist named DeBroglie gave us his contribution, a concept he dubbed the wave-particle duality. This one really flipped my wig. When I was growing up, our science classes taught us about atoms. We learned about a nucleus composed of a number of protons and neutrons being orbited by a number of electrons; those numbers had something to do with what kind of element the atom was or was a part of. The illustrations looked like little solar systems. The particles were usually depicted in the illustrations as little pink blue and green balls, and the idea we all got was that they were like tiny grains of matter, like microscopic sand or something.
What DeBroglie told us was that these particles were actually WAVES. The “building blocks” of all that we know are miniscule vibrations in space. These vibrations, in combination with each other, make up the complex world we exist in, from the skin we slough off to the earth we stand on to the sun we orbit. It kind of destabilizes one’s concept of one’s self. Just as a wave at a certain frequency and wavelength is detected by the apparatus tuned for it, our ears, is perceived as sound, and a vibration at a certain frequency and wavelength is detectible by our eyes and called light, and many more vibrations we cannot detect at all, vibrations at certain frequencies and wavelengths combine to form complex structure which we experience as matter. That makes me feel pretty good. It allows me to imagine the entire universe as a supreme symphony, of which I am a part, a movement, an arrangement of notes. It also reminds me of things people said, like the Reiki practitioners who spoke of “tuning” and achieving higher frequencies, and the acid heads and schizophrenics who spoke of hearing colors and seeing sound. It makes me think of Om, the breath of the world, and of IHIH, the first cause, like the first ripple in the surface of a calm water. The water itself? The disturbance that caused the ripple? The relationship between the two? All of the above, all THREE?
A Baha’i friend of mine once said to me, “Religion and science agree, people just haven’t discovered it yet.”
And I’ve been in front of the computer screen for way too long. Sorry for being so long winded. Keep up the good work.
...and I see plenty of typos and glaring grammatical errors in my post. Fire away, critics. I also failed to mention in referring to the Civil Rights movement that it was the churches that served as the headquarters, the gathering places, and the networks for the movement.
I really should go to bed now.
My wife Kathleen said this to me the other day:
“Truth is the fiction that sneaks up on you.”
Almost made it through another day.
Peace & Good Forklifts.
- Clancy
I would just like everyone to know that the Babylonian Empire stretched through modern day Iraq, Syria, Israel, Jordan, Eastern Turkey and Egypt, Western Iran and the top of the Arabian Peninsula. And if it’s true that ZERO originated in Babylon, than Mr. Vonnegut is indeed right, the Arabs, whether Muslim at that point in history or not, did indeed invent the sign for nothing. And just a side note, our numeric system (as in 1, 2, 3) is called the Hindu-Arabic Numeral System, and whether Arabs or Hindus wrote those numbers first, I think Mr. Vonnegut’s point is that the ancestors of the people now so maligned in Iraq made enormous contributions to our history, culture and lives. And that ain’t no bullshit.
I appologize for straying from the general topic:
Dear Mr. Vonnegut,
The Chinese did use gunpowder for primitive guns involving rocks and bamboo.
While this is not meant to compare you to Christ, Mr. Vonnegut: “Forgive these commentators, for they know not what they do.” You, at 81, another roaring golden lion near in age to my father, have seen more and probably forgotten more than I will ever know. Thank you for taking the time to use your eloquent voice and share it with everyone. In a word growing increasingly topsy-turvy, where the alleged “Leader of the Free World” uses shiny, happy language to mask initiatives with seemy, frightening underbellies, it’s quite refreshing to know not everyone has partaken of the Kool-Aid they offer.
Vonnegut is a bitter man. He may be in pain from illness, his drinking habit, or simply a lack of love for himself and others. I do not know.
What I can say is this. To read and absorb Vonnegut’s writing is one more confirmation for the unfortunate that darkness is pervasive and persistent, which it is not.
If you are depressed. If you feel powerless. Talk with a therapist. Start simply, slowly. Get a checkup by a doctor. Work on making sure you can make ends meet, now and in the future. Then start thinking about your job. Do you enjoy it? If not, why. Can you change it? Probably yes, once you pick past all the self generated excuses. Are you close to your friends? Can you get in a fight with them, share your personal feelings, weaknesses, and still be friends? Then find a lover. Clean yourself up. Make yourself attractive. Read a book on the subject.
These are the valuable lessons I have learned in life, and they have severed me well. Very very well.
Good luck, and email me if you have a question.
-Taylor
If anything, Taylor, I’d say Vonnegut has a better grasp on his feelings than most at his. Most people at that age, speaking from having elderly parents, aunts, uncles and such, are angry, slow to change and blame everything on the younger generation.
Vonnegut Bitter? I don’t think so; more of a realist who wishes the future generations well but isn’t going to sugar-coat anything.
I’m of the belief myself, that kids today have it much rougher than I had it growing up. I didn’t have to worry about a classmate packing heat in revenge. There were no metal detectors and video games weren’t around yet to distract me from doing my homework. All you hear about today is the pressure put on today’s youth to succeed, goddammit! And that’s because college is so outrageously expensive, proportionately more so than even 10 years ago.
Are you of the opinion that people who take medicine for depression are weak? Should “pull themselves up by their bootstraps” whatever that means?
With 25 years of nuclear testing, preceeded by horrible pollution to our air, water and soil, it’s a wonder most people aren’t suffering from more things.
And I think you’re taking his writing much too seriously if you believe that. It’s just writing, humor and opinions by a great novelist. If you read more into it then you’re missing the best part—enjoyment.
I find his In These Times articles refreshing after putting up with a visit from my parents where they proceeded to tell me how horrible I am for being a member of the ACLU, for jumping on any little flaw in my life, for not writhing on the floor in absolute agony over every little problem I have and for ruining my neice’s wedding with their pettiness, complaints and childish behavior. THEY are supposed to be the aged, wise and mature ones? I love and respect them but not the attitudes I find so common among the aging.
May I be struck mute at that age if I wind up the same way.
I’m a big proponent of psychoactive medications used to give people a chance to improve their lives.
I have read several of Vonnegut’s books. I have also seen him show up to a speech I attended late and drunk. I find the subject matter he speaks on, almost in totality, is negative. Not that what he says isn’t true, but why talk about only the negative? Bad things happen all the time. Good things happen all the time. What do we accomplish by blaming others, who we generally have no control over, when the person we do have the most control over is suffering/depressed/lonely/insecure/etc. needlessly? Surely there is some facet of your life that could improve the length and quality of your time here. This is certainly true of me. And this is where I focus my efforts. Consequently my interactions with most people I meet tend to be more meaningful, enjoyable, and generally more valuable.
-Taylor
People like you, fortunately, aren’t fit to wipe Vonnegut’s boots, let alone respond to his articulate messages. Apparently, just because he sees and is willing to point out the fact our Emperor has no clothes on, and not all of us have taken the happy right-wing Stepford outlook, you’re advocating medication. Since one of the Bushites said the same thing about people without jobs, I’ll go out on a limb and say you’re probably a staunch Repub example of “compassionate” conservative. Something in the smarmy, judgmental tone just points to it. You know, it’s easy for people who don’t think very deeply to be happy about everything; it’s the blessing of a superficial outlook that tosses platitudes out as a means to solve problems. So much easier than really thinking, for those who are devoid of the ability. Did you get your “insights” from Cosmopolitan or Redbook this week? They smack of simplicity, in the worst possible sense.
Just a few things I wanted to throw into the pot here:
1. “Vote for none of the above!” -Richard Pryor as Monty Brewster in Brewster’s Millions
2. Cogito Ergo Sum ( Latin for I think therfore I am) - Descarte
This is the only truth in our world of bent straws and evil geniuses, so follow it.
3. And lastly, after reading all your posts, yes I have no life, I work like a dog to pay for an 8.5 x 11 piece of sheepskin that says I’m smart, I have only one question… If you think something’s wrong with your world, or this world for that matter, what the hell are you gonna do about it?
Hint: Bitching only makes it worse…
To Kurt Vonnegut: Harrison Bergeron( read it when I was 10, brilliant)
Slaughter House 5, Awesome! It was tough to understand the first time through, but good enough to read again.
This is going to seem weird coming from the #?!+ who posted some pretty shrill stuff a while back. But we’ve already gotten into one vitriolic ad hom snarl, and I’m ashamed to say I helped perpetuate and drastically accelerate it. I do feel that none of us is above a good scolding now and then, especially if it’s constructive. We could all stand to be slapped back into our places from time to time. But it’s best if the one doing the slapping can refrain from getting too worked up and going overboard. It makes for an entertaining display of fireworks, but there is a severe risk of the original point getting drowned out, and of a muck forming in which only confusion and resentment thrives. As it was I had my fiery retort all ready to spew when LX came along and took it to another level, and I knew I had to let it go. It was descending into vanity.
The words of a wise man’s mouth are gracious, but the lips of a fool shall swallow him up. Ecclesiastes 10:12
(deal with it, bible haters)
So, the catastrophe of this thread descending into mindless egotistical mudslinging, so typical of discussion boards, was averted, the bad feelings routed. Cheers to LX. (Who was that masked poster? Sure cleaned up this thread!)
So I humbly appeal to the individual who declares which of his/her fellow lunatics are and aren’t fit to wipe Vonnegut’s boots, let alone respond to his articulate messages. Take it from a fruitcake. I entreat said crackpot to understand what hangs in the balance and to refrain from ad hom personal attacks, such as calling his/her fellow headcases staunch Repub conservatives. Maybe the post seemed a little shallow, but don’t you think “Repub” was a little harsh? Next thing you know, it’s knee-jerk liberal commie this and facist pig in a blanket that, and enemy of the people and take ten and burn baby burn and tear him for his bad verses.
And in the aftermath, rubbing the tear gas out of our eyes and nursing our rubber bullet wounds, counting those no longer among us, maybe we try to remember what we were debating before it descended into self-serving vanity.
But Mister Fruitcakes, you hypocrite, how can you sit there and say that, and call us all crazy at the same time?
Answer: Because you’re all off your rockers. It takes one to know one. The truth hurts. Slapping someone with the truth is different from hurling insults. The last thing I want to do is insult anyone. Personally I find belittling someone’s faith to be far more insulting than calling them a nutty fruitcake, but that’s just me. Out to lunch, rubber room ready, neurotic on good days, psychotic on not-so-good days, you’ll admit it to yourseld one of these dum-de-dumb days. The sooner everyone comes clean with themselves and grows up enough to admit that they have no clue what the $#%* is going on, the sooner paradise will appear, just as though it had been waiting, all around us, all along.
No man has a wholly undiseased mind…in one way or another all men are mad.
-Twain, “The Memorable Assassination”
“When we remember we are all mad, the mysteries of life disappear and life stands explained.”
-Twain again, Notebook
True scientists will admit they don’t have much more than a clue, the same can be said of true spiritual seekers. It’s only non-scientists who misunderstand and fall under an illusion that nearly everything has been figured out, like a frontier that’s steadily closing. The truth is that, thus far, it just keeps going. That’s what’s so compelling about it. With every question that gets answered, a multitude of new questions arise. With every discovery comes the realization that there’s a whole lot more that we don’t know than what we previously thought we knew we didn’t know. Big just keeps getting bigger, and small just keeps getting smaller. The universe is finite with a center? Who’s to say our “big bang” (misnomer) isn’t but one of many such occurences, spreading from their centers like the ripples formed by raindrops on a pond? (if you’ll pardon the two-dimensional metaphor) And now scientists are close to proving the existence of “new” subatomic particles that may rearrange our way of understanding the miniscule end of the spectrum of infinity, if you’ll pardon another misuse. Our understanding of the magnitude of the question of life, the universe, and everything in it seems only to be limited by the size and power of our telescopes and microscopes, simplistically and metaphorically speaking, that is.
Well, it looks like our banter hasn’t scared Mr. Vonnegut off. He’s put up a new article. You wonder if he’s read any of this?
Whoah! I just hopped over to the discussion board for the other Vonnegut entry. It’s full of exactly what we managed to avoid over here. Check it out, it’s like night and day. When you see pages and pages of “You’re an idiot,” “No, you are,” “I know you are but what am I,” “He’s stupid,” etc. etc., the “Cold Turkey” discussion board seems like a miracle. They even have a neo-nazi over there, and he’s the one of the most eloquent of the whole bickering bunch! I throw myself on my face and pledge to control my passions and uphold the integrity of this thread. I’m passionate; I let my passions get the better of me. I think crapping on someone’s faith is rude as hell. That’s because I’ve been around the world a bit. I know better than to just shit on someone’s faith. For the sake of not contributing to a spiraling out of control of what is, well, a more thoughtful thread than what’s going on in the “I Love You, Madam Librarian” pool, I will try to voice my righteous indignation in the most dignified manner my powers of self-control can allow.
“I did smoke a joint of marijuana one time with Jerry Garcia and the Grateful Dead, just to be sociable. It didn’t seem to do anything to me, one way or the other, so I never did it again.”
To Mister Vonnegut, if you’re reading this:
It is well known among marijuana enthusiasts that most people don’t get high the first time. Personally, I didn’t feel anything until the third time, bringing about the old “third time’s a charm” uh, thing. A friend of mine claims it took him seventeen tries. SEVENTEEN?! He says he was determined. He’s a brilliant fellow, a painter. Seventeenth time was the “charm” for him. Now he’s a believer. With today’s advancements in cultivation techniques and so forth, and if you’re interested, it might be worth your while to try again and sample a little of what modern horticulture has to offer. I promise, it’s harmless. No one in human history has ever died from smoking marijuana. Smoking is of course not the best thing to do for your lungs, but I’m talking to a tobacco man here. I highly reccomend scoring some quality stuff. Don’t waste your time and breath on something that was maybe decent once, grown in Mexico, smashed into what potheads call a “brick” (that’s where the vegetative matter has been conpressed into a dense block for smuggling, often soaked in diesel or some other crap during its illegal journey across borders) and sold on the cheap containing God-knows-what. Surely a man of your stature can get connected with what the young’uns affectionately refer to as “kind.” If it’s fluffy, sparkly and pretty like a flower, like that stuff you might see in a High Times centerfold, you’re on the right track. If it looks like what happens to raked autumn leaves after a thunderstorm, it’s hardly worth the effort.
If you feel up to the experiment, please let us all know what you think. Or don’t. It’s your experience. I reccomend a comfortable setting, surrounded by stuff that inspires you. Most reccomend the presence of beloved music and art. They say it’s all about atmosphere. I couldn’t agree more.
Why am I reaching for Twain to justify calling everyone crazy? My justification is right here:
What does “A.D.” signify? That commemorates an inmate of this lunatic asylum we call Earth who was nailed to a wooden cross by a bunch of other inmates.
Who can honestly say Nurse Rached wasn’t in need of a little medication her damn self?
This lunatic asylum we call Earth. Are you an Earthling?
A citizen of planet Earth.
Fruitcake,
I was under the impression that this was a discussion area. People throw ideas out there and generally get some feedback. You however enjoy going at it yourself. Do you ever listen? or do you enjoy “talking” the hind legs of a donkey?
There is enough people out there who want to say something, so give it a break.
By all means, don’t let me stop you. What was it you wanted to say?
Taylor,
I’m ashamed of myself for making comments for someone I’ve never seen speak before, as you have. Also, I feel a little disappointed that KV showed up drunk, even though I love getting loaded once in awhile, but can’t since the epilepsy—and I’m German and Irish to boot, so I’m doubly screwed.
You’ve read his bookss AND seen him speak in person and I took a “higher moral ground” on you when in fact, I was the hypocrite.
I still love Vonnegut’s work and wish him well and a continued good fight.
Thanks for being patient and handling my comments with courtesy.
-Windex
Just to clear the air, Kurt Vonnegut is not an alcoholic, for as much as some of you may want to believe he is. Second, he does not suffer from depression. He’s actually quite a funny, gregarious octogenarian. I hope to be that cool when I’m 50. Third, I’ve seen him speak in public, and he was neither negative nor drunk. Fourth, I can say all this with this proud air of authority because I know him personally. Let’s keep the personal attacks to a minimum, they’re obviously unfounded and pointless. And to Windex: Never lose faith in a person because of hearsay.
Rock on you threadsters.
Great op/ed by Vonnegut. Just came across it.
Hey in case anyone is still wondering, HanktheHobo owns you all. lol. Thanks Hank. Good to see somebody having fun feeding the trolls.
RE: to your last post Hank: There is no such thing as a selfless act. It’s like trying to pick yourself up off the ground by lifting up on your shoes. Simply impossible IMO.
Maybe a total accident that has a benevolent result could be considered a selfless _action_? I’d argue that a personal mishap (which results in an unintentional benefit to a 3rd party) qualifies as a selfless _action_ but not an _act_.
These comments should be published wherever the original article is published. We’re all drunk on the power of anonymous posting. :]
Its not oil that we’re hooked on. There are lots of technical options to oil.
No, what we’re hooked on is the inner-chimpanzee.
Let me explain.
Part of the reason—maybe the main reason—it is so painful being a human is that we’re technological creatures. Indeed it is our technology more than our ability to speak to each other that most distinguishes us from other animals. Human heritage is a huge technological fix progressing from one stage to the next.
Each stage of technical advance does two contradictory things: 1) It takes us a little further from where we can afford to indulge our inner chimp. 2) It provides the illusion that we have turned the universe into a subSaharan Africa habitat complete with climate control and abundant food.
It is the second thing, the illusion that the universe has been tamed into being a subSaharan habitat, that we’re hooked on.
We remember what it was like to be chimps back home. It was much nicer then even though we’d get in nasty fights and be eaten by lions. All our technology is nothing more than a simulation of chimp habitat. We hope to have everything under enough control that we can forget about all this machinery around us and just do chimp things again.
Things don’t work that way.
At first I´d like to apologize my language (I´m from Finland [You know the place next to the ex-Soviet Union] and english is my fourth language). I don´t have much to comment about that text, expect it´s so true. We Europeans often wonder, why you Yankees doesn´t understand what you are doing. Or why you can´t admit how wrong you have been. Sure there are many who does, but it doesn´t seem like it in where we stand (Europeans).
Well, we´ll see in march if you have learned anything… If Bush gets elected, tou´re in deep shit. Your reputation as a model for a free and great country is already almost gone in other countries. But you might have a chance to save it. Bush ain´t the answer. I don´t say that Kerry is, but he can´t be worse.
Finally, keep on going mr. Vonnegut, I ave you. It´s a shame that your whole production isn´t translated on to finnish.
Gracefully yours, Tommi Kotikangas, Finland
hi,..i liked to read about cold turkey,..but i had need 1 thing. that was What’s the define of the cold turkey,..could you please send me defination of the cold turkey please
thank you,..
Undram
writing of this sort is by and large a thankless job, so i’m saying: thank you, Mr. Vonnegut. please don’t quit.
Undram,
“Cold turkey” is an expression. We use it when a drug addict tries to stop doing drugs. Vonnegut was talking about our addiction to fossil fuel. If the drug addict stops completely one day, and not gradually, we say he/she “quit cold turkey.” For example, Richard smokes tobacco. He smokes twenty cigarretes a day, and he wants to quit. If he decreases the amount of tobacco gradually, to 15 a day, then 10 a day, then 7, and so on, he is not quitting cold turkey. If he smokes 20 cigarrettes every day, then one day he smokes ZERO cigarrettes, and then never smokes again, he has quit COLD TURKEY. Understand?
Hey, there’s that zero again. It really IS incorrigible!
(Maybe I shouldn’t encourage it.)
I am so happy to have come across this article and thread. I got here by way of a mention in Mother Earth magazine of Kurt Vonnegut’s article “Cold Turkey”. Recently, I reread Vonnegut’s “Bluebeard” coincidentally. I like to reread some of my favorite authors or novels over the years to see how my insights and perceptions have changed or remain the same. I collected Vonnegut’s novels in my very late teens and early 20’s (late 80’s). I found his writing immediately draw me in again, I was never bored. I am glad to see that Kurt Vonnegut is still a humanist and still has a fresh way with words. His time- and memory - traveling characters influenced and changed my linear thinking at the time. His humor mixed with human empathy resonated with me.
I find all these posts and arguments interesting. I intend to read more of his articles in these archives, but i had to share some philosophical thoughts that I have recently pondered. I had them all typed out (which is a feat because I suk at typing) when it all disappeared (boohoo) so I am determined to say it again, though now it is a little briefer and I will make points in two entries.
I just finished reading “On Film” by Stephen Mulhall (published by Routledge 2002, part of “Thinking In Action” philosophy series) which examines the 4 “Alien” movies and a few others by the various directors. This book opened my mind to ideas expressed that I didn’t really consider when I watched them. These are humanist themes so I think they relate philosophically. I would just like to share some insightful quotes by this brilliant thinker, quotes that say it better than I could ever dream of trying to convey it in writing. Since “Blade Runner” was just voted a sci-fi favorite among scientists here a re a few quotes regarding that film.
p.35 “It follows that the humanity of the replicants is in the hands of their fellows; their accession to human status involves their being acknowledged as human by others, and if their humanity is denied, it withers.”
p.36 (Ridley) “Scott invites us to acknowledge that a refusal to acknowledge another’s humanity constitutes a denial of the humanity in oneself.”
p.39 ...“mortal finitude is not reducible to the fact of our finite lifespan; it is rather constituted by the fact that every moment of human life is necessarily shadowed by the possiblity of its own non-existence.”
The Heideggerian roots:
p.40 ...“to live one’s life authentically is to let every moment burn brightly whilst (perhaps by) still acknowledging that each such moment shall pass.”
p.43 “he” [Roy Baty] “sees that, since mortality is as internal to human existence as embodiment, genuine humanity turns on finding the right relation to it.”
Now I want to share a long passage from the same book )“On Film” by Stephan Mulhall from chapter one, “Kane’s Son, Cain’s Daughter” that so eloquently encapsulates the overriding themes of “Alien”:
pp31, 32
“Ripley’s unremitting drive to preserve her integrity is thus, in essence, an expression of her sense of alienation from life, nature and the cosmos, and from everything in herself that participates in—that binds her ineluctably to—that which she hates so purely. For after all, does she not in the end succeed in imposing her will upon Ash,” [the robotic science officer]“Mother” [the spaceship]“and the alien itself? Is not her final victory over the monster in the ‘Narcissus’ (the ‘Nostromo’‘s shuttle), her success in creating a space from which to give voice to the mayday message that she speaks over the film’s concluding frames, achieved by reshaping her environment (making it a vacuum)and herself (suiting up) so that she might bury a harpoon in the heart of her opponent and in the heart of the heartless cosmos into which her weapon dispatches it? What better exemplification of the masculine will-to-power fo which her thoughts, deeds and underlying psychology declare such detestation (as if the alien she confronts in the ‘Narcissus’ is a reflection of herself)? (Seeing this beautifully choreographed assault, this seamless dovetailing of heart, mind and spirit in the service of vengeance, we might recall Ash’s description of the alien—immediately after it has burst from Kane’s chest—as ‘Kane’s son’. This is the film’s most explicit reference to the alien’s unmanning capacity to make human males pregnant; but its aural reference to the Bible’s name for the first human murderer further implies that the monster’s death-dealing rapacity is not essentially alien to humanity, but rather at work in the first human family, and never eradicated from the human family as such thereafter. If, then, Ripley is a sister under the skin to Kane’s son, she is Cain’s daughter—offspring not of God’s beloved Abel but of his wrathful brother, the first violator of human solidarity, condemned by God to be a fugitive and vagabond on the earth, essentially not at home in the universe He created.) But if what Ripley hates is what saves her from what she hates (if it is the pure flame of the life in her that overcomes its own monstrous, externalized incarnation), must she end by hating herself, by overcoming that which she hates in herself, or by overcoming her hatred?”
Wow. I think this passage works on so many levels.
Do you suppose we are all just talking to ourselves?
Does anyone really have the attention span to read much of this—let alone REALLY listen?
When was that last time you had a unique opinion that was really listened to—by someone other than a close friend or stratigic cohort?
When was the last time you listened to someone with a differing view-point, and really heard what their life was expressing through them to the world?
Mr. V has the gift of being heard—through work and “tallent” I guess it’s called—but unlike most in such position, he has something NEW to share. The freshness of his vision is in it’s simplicity—just what I’m talking about!—the ablity to accept information, to listen to the complexity of it all!
Through sharing differing views and experience, humanity takes part in the survival strategy that has gotten us this far…and is still our best hope for the challenges of…now.
But this process relies on listening, and the advancement of a group consiousness where EVERYTHING that neeeds to be said, gets said and is allowed to be part of the shared story.
Everything has already been done, every mistake has been tried to some extent already… the results are already all around us, it’s just that paying proper attention is a skill of the few—while the practice of involvement by the many to actively LISTEN has simply lapsed. This is the major humanistic failing of this age, around which the major global problems of the day go unchecked.
<(’-’<) <(’-’)> (>’-’)>
the end?
But “seriously”... Thank you Mr. Vonnegut. If you’re ever in Chicago I’ll give you a tour of the alley next to my school. keke ^^
Chicago alleys are cool!
Good Point Colin.
Everybody has something to say and often enough it is worth listening to. I guess we are all so horrified by what is happening around us, all we are doing is commenting, stating the obvious and not listening to potential solutions.
Keep in mind, though, this is a message board. This is where we actually exhale something of what we’ve inhaled. HOPEfully we are doing more listening than speaking, as the old “two ears, one mouth” saying suggests. The sound of silence doesn’t translate too well into typed text.
One can usually tell, however, from typed text, how much listening, reading, paying attention, or comprehending the typist had done before opening up his/her/its digital mouth.
“The solution lies within the problem.”
-George Clinton, “Good Thoughts, Bad Thoughts”
Sometimes when a problem is being discussed, some people are prone to standing up and saying, “Why complain? Why don’t you DO something about it?”
However, there is a difference between stating and discussing a problem and mere complaining. Speaking about a problem is a way of analyzing the problem, which is a vital step in solving the problem. Therefore, talking about it IS doing something about it.
The problem we have been challenged with here, put forth by Mr. Vonnegut, is one that has been struggled with for millenia.
WHAT IS LIFE ALL ABOUT?
No small errand.
First Zero occurs in Mayan inscription. Its not clear if the Mayan theocracts were nice guys, seems they may have thrown heartless bodies down those steep steps. They ran out of something… firewood to make lime?... enthusiastic serfs?.. and revertd rather suddenly to a smaller population without temple-building.
When cheap oil runs out (2008 CE? 2012CE?) we can expect a similar crash. KV is correct to describe USA reliance on cheap fossils as an addiction
so many pepole with so much to say, if you want to know the truth,it will find you.
Very astute, Mr Vonnegut. It must feel good not to disapoint people who have come to have such high expectations of you.
I always have to rememeber a stupid joke that I was told. The joke itself is short and I believe extremely reflective of the human condition.
The joke goes like this…
“Why does a dog lick is balls? Becuase he can.”
Why do humans do what they do so well. Inflicting pain and misery on others.
Because we can. We need no reason.
Some of us are quite good at inflicting pleasure and bliss upon one another. It’s loads more fun.
I challenge Hank the Hobo to think about his statement that Islamic (or Arab) cultures have made many many contributions to culture and society (or something along those lines)... Truth be told, they’ve done little besides stealing the ideas (making them available to others - - at a price) of the cultures they’ve conquered and enslaved or forcefully converted (“OK, all youse wantin’ to convert to Islam move over here to the right, all youse who want to die move over there, to theleft…”) and begrudge anyone else any sort of humanity, comfort, or security within the Arab/Islamic sphere of influence (“Dar as Islam”). There’s no need to pat the Arab’Islamic culture on the back, they do it for themselves enough, or have their slaves do it for them. Of course there are millions upon millions living in these countries who’d rather do nothing than raise their families in peace and security, yet they allow the teachers and promoters of extremism in the Arab/Islamic world get away with too much (including their sons) because it is WHAT THE PROPHET SAID THEY SHOULD DO. Ask an Indian, an Armenian, a Coptic Egyptian, a black Sudanese what Arab/Islamic “culture” has contributed to the world, and find out the truth.
I believe, I am the Hank A. Hobo you are referring to. My name is Justine, and I am neither Muslim, nor from an African or Asian country. And for as much as I love arguing with biggots who can’t stand the thought of anyone other than an American or Anglo Saxon making a positive contribution to history, I am writing merely to say that everyone, and I mean every group, regardless of color, ethnicity or religion, has at one point or another been both an aggressor or a victim.
The Germanic tribes fought their way all over Europe cutting heads and raping. The Scandinavians plundered and pillaged. The Romans dominated most of Europe and a lot of Africa. YES, I am talking about those super cool, democratic (although at times despotic), very civilized Romans. And you’ve got to hand it to those Arabs, they did a good job of conquest themselves. Of course, they were one of the most influencial and powerful of all of the ancient civilizations, and we can’t attribute all of that to luck. But as with all great civilizations, the periods of greatness must come to an end. Rome collapsed, the Germanic tribes settled on Germany, and the Scandinavians settled for the artic circle. And despite the poking and prodding of Christians, the Muslim empire only lost it’s stongholds in Southern Europe. But what am I doing giving you this long and winding history. I was making a point.
You talk all high and mighty about Arabs being this bestial force that is only capable of distruction and hate. But I say look inward. Look at the country you live in. European Americans drove the native people of this land almost to extinction, and for what? Land. Money. They stole land from Mexico, the Carribean and Guam. And for what? Land. Money. God helps those who help themselves, I guess. It seems like the only way these great civilizations know how to get anything is through death and destruction. The United States is the latest and greatest of these civilizations. It’s made strong by its people and its diversity. But as with all other civilizations, this one will fall too. And I hope that when it does, people won’t look down on us and say we only did wrong, that our culture isn’t worth the dirt on the soles of our shoes. I hope that people will realize that for all the good and bad in our long history we played a large part in making the world what it is. And I hope that at that point in time, people will be educated enough to recognize that fact.
Mr Vonnegut,
I am glad you are still alive.
I see Mr Bush is busy, busy, busy…
We need to talk. There’s something in my thermos flask you need to see.
Have you scene Fahrenheit 9/11?
If not, GO AND SEE IT!
One correction - it has recently come to light that the 10th century Chinese did use gunpowder for more than fireworks or signal rockets - it didn’t take long for the familiar human behaviour of killing each other to manifest itself. There is no blameless or noble segment of human kind. The Arabs in the 1300’s invented the gun - using black powder to shoot arrows from iron-reinforced bamboo tubes.
Mr. Vonnegut’s poor impression of the state of humanity is simply an observation. He is correct - certainly there used to be the impression amongst WWII-era American soldiers that their government appreciated their sacrifice and that they would not be sent in harm’s way for nothing. This is clearly no longer the case.
It is notable that there is evidence of chimpanzee homicide - that chimps are capable of raiding and killing their own kind. This is not surprising since we share so much DNA.
I, at age 49, still have a modicum of hope that the ideals so many have died for in the cause of liberty, truth and justice for all may still be preserved in America. It begins with removal of the hippocrits currently in power. My hopes will either be dashed or supported come Nov 4th - unless Bush / Cheney / Rove stop the election.
Kudos to Kurt.
At least he can pronounce strategy and spell absolute. Dubya spells it “Absolut” to this day, after his favorite vodka. Speaking of bullshitters…
Let us demand that those who wish to post the ten commandments follow them. Thou shall not kill, steal, covet. Thou shall honor thy father and thy mother. Good advice. But most of all, when we fail to live up to these lofty aspirations, let us “not use God’s name” as if he was telling us it was ok to lie/cheat/steal/kill/worship idols/covet. He most certainly did not tell us it was ok. Jesus said to forgive us because we’re idiots, but that’s hardly a blanket approval of war, greed, executions, and mispronouncing nucular.
Or having nucular weapons.
On a side note, in case K reads this drivel… In fate’s worse than death, you wrote a requiem that moved me, and discussed a one time only performance. Are there any recordings of this, anywhere? I have a carton of unfiltered pall malls in it for anyone who can locate it.
Howdy,ya all
With the risk of being redundant,I would like to
stress the fact that Kurt Vonnegut ,and with him a large and merry bunch,have a somewhat “exotic"perception of the Arab-Muslim world.
Is it because the USA,(Blessed they are),have
a 0,5 percent “muslim population…
We have ,in France,a nice 12-14 percent muslim population.
I teach in suburbs with 50-70 percent proportion.
I would very much like for Mr Vonnegut to come and visit and live in these areas.
I love America,but it is sometimes becoming
an achievement in itself when you hear Mr Vonnegut angelic blabbering,or Mr Bush
calling for the entrance of Turkey in the EEC.
Both attitudes denote a total disinterest in the
fate of the Europeans,or is it total ignorance,or both?
The Arabs did -not- invent the numbers we use.The Indo Europeans did.As well as the zero. It appeared in 458 AD in an indian cosmology treaty.Defined in 628 by Brahmagupta as the result of a whole number substracted from itself.
It was not before the eight century that the zero,as well as the rest of the Indo Europeans numerals,were introduced at the court of Bagdad….by an indian astronomer.
The Arabs ,in this story,are therefore transmitters,not discoverers.
Kurt Vonnegut,in this story as well as in others….. a bullshitter.
Why does any of this matter? A: French people are retards. B: Kurt Vonnegut is a retard. C: I’m a retard. D: If I’ve learned anything from Kurt Vonnegut, it’s that we’re all mean-spirited, spiteful and petty. And there’s not much you can do to save yourself from that, and the human race is far beyond anyone’s scope. Kurt Vonnegut may or may not have his facts straight. (If you would stop being a psuedo intellectual and cited your sources like a high school freshman has to, I could verify or dismiss your arguments.) I, however, have heard from college professors and doctors of math that the Middle Eastern cultures did concieve the first symbol for null. Not to say that they know, only that I’d believe them before I’d take your word for it. However, that hardly answers the rest of the argument of American’s perception of middle eastern/muslim individuals as “camel jockeys” and “towel heads” How did this essay in anyway indicate apathy towards Europeans? I would think that responsible consumerism and new technologies would benefit all people, and I believe that’s what was advocated in this article, along with other common themes of Vonnegut’s, human decency, civil rights, and (true) Christian morals. I still feel to see why you brand him a bullshitter, but I’ll leave you with this: I’ve paid $5-15 for every book he’s ever seen fit to print, including short story and prose collections. I’m not alone in this, he is one of the most read, respected and referenced living writers. You, however… I doubt your sophoric hype would sell a single copy. Am I wrong?
Maybe a bullshitter, but at least he has something to say, and can amuse readers while informing them. You do niether. Warmest regards.
Mr. Vonnegut,
You make some very valid conclusions about how our country is unhuman and we are addicts of materialism. I also agree with you that power corrupts us, I don’t agree with the the acusations you arose to the reason for us being in war. I believe it to be extreamly disrespectful to make remarks about the president of the United States. To disagree with certain policies and descions is ok, but to mock and ridicule is another. These are the political leaders of our nation and by saying that they are power drunk is a slap in the face to your own nation you live in. Soldiers are out there risking their lives for us, and you go and critize what its all about. What our country needs right now is like your son said for eachother to help one another. Rather we disagree or agree with war, we need to respect those brave soldiers and give them our prayers and comfort. The only reason we are in war right now is because of the tragedy on 9/11. Of course there are other under lying factors such as oil, but that is not the reason we are in war. The president of the United States is sending a message that we are strong and aren’t going to let terroists defeat us. Before you go and voice your opinions you need to realize the extent of your remarks and that your arguments are very one sided.
Lala, I’m going to try to keep my cool about this. Your comments were infuriating. Perhaps you haven’t been clued in yet, so let this be our opportunity.
The war in Iraq has nothing, NOTHING to do with the terrorist attacks of Sept 11, 2001. Iraq was in no way involved in those attacks. The invasion and occupation of Iraq is a terrible mistake, and our troops are paying the price. Those soldiers enlisted to defend our country with their lives. They are victims of the filthiest fraud; they have been tricked into giving up their lives and taking the lives of countless others for reasons other than the defense of their country.
Research Depleted Uranium
Research Cluster bombs
Research the number of Iraq wounded
And I challenge you to do as thorough a search as possible for any evidence that Iraq had anything to do with the Sep. 11 attacks. I can tell you you won’t find any, aside from Bush, Rumsfeld and Rice lying to you that there is, but I don’t want you to take my word for it. Search high and low, and discover the horrible lie that has sent our children to killing, poisoning, dismemberment and death.
And be sure you’re registered to vote on Nov 2nd. If you’re not, remember the deadline to register is rapidly approaching.
Because America is a democracy, the blood is on all our hands. (U.S. people, I mean)
NOTHING HURT. Attention must be paid.
Lala,
America has a solid history of “dissing” the sitting president. It comes with the territory. And Bush is very deserving: He’s a boob of the first order. Do not equate the President with the country; he’s an employee, and not a very good one. I look forward to firing the bastard on Nov. 2. And just to set things straight: our soldiers are fighting in Afghanistan because of 9/11. I’ve yet to hear a single good reason as to why they are also fighting in Iraq. And yes, our servicemen and servicewomen deserve our support, which includes standing up to our officials and their wreckless policies. “My country, right or wrong” should not be an affirmation of blind faith but rather one of responsibility, one I take very seriously. Lastly, opinions are by their nature one-sided. Vonnegut’s only duty is to call it like he sees it, not to present the other side’s arguement for them.
Hank pretty much sums it all up for me. Let’s go have some coffee somewhere.
vonnegut is astounding
i met my best friend because we were in the same english class and one day he shoved “breakfast of champions” at me and said i might like it.
i just finished timequake
this man is addicting
and hilarious
and everyone who posted on here with pretentious blather about the origins of zero and how atheism is stupid is really missing the point.
please PLEASE keep writing
and i promise that when you die i’ll make sure to say “kurt is in heaven now”
I don`t recall anyone saying atheism is stupid. I DO, however, recall several atheists showing no reservations about gratuitously shitting on religious people as being intellectually inferior. Anyone out there actually reading what`s being posted?
Easily fooled. Hank pisses on Christianity, then turns around and uses lawyer`s logic to pretend that he did nothing of the sort. And you fall for it. The blind leadeth the blind. Anyone who claims that a question doesn`t count as an argument has clearly never read Plato. Reading Rainbow, eh?
People shit on religion on this thread, not a peep out of anyone. Hey, that`s totally cool, apparently. You people must have done a lot of traveling around the globe, to be so tolerant. Someone DARES to consult, oh I don`t know, religious doctrine in a discussion on the topic of “why we`re here,” and it`s oh those facist hypocrites are oppressing us poor superior intellectuals again! When will we ever be free?
The worst thing about reactionary bigots, (They`re called “wolves in sheep`s clothing”), even worse than all the witch-burning and crusading, is the fact that they drive people further away from seeking any kind of spiritual truth. A culture gets so drowned in Jerry Falwells and Jim Joneses that people assume that that`s all there is to any kind of religion and want no part of it.
The fact that Hank only thought of the God of the reactionary wolves when I brought up the word “divine” is a perfect illustration of what I`m talking about.
I`d argue that Webster`s Collegiate Dictionary is not the best place to find the meaning of the word “divine,” but even if you do play it that way, I have a 1977 Webster`s Collegiate Dictionary, too. The word SACRED appears as a synonym.
The problem here is dualistic thinking. The question is not atheism vs theism. That`s just another deceptive duality. Things are infinitely more complex.
Hank, I believe you are not an atheist who arrived at atheism after a spiritual quest, or as a result of having never been exposed to religion. I believe you are a typical Bible Belt atheist. (For those of you not from the U.S., the “Bible Belt” is a geographical region of the Southern United States characterized by a strong presence of Protestant Christianity.) You grew up with reactionary preachers shoving their fundamentalism down your throat (which, in the Bible Belt, is often pretty light on the gospels, the actual teachings of Jesus, and heavy on Old Testament and Paul), then decided you`d had enough lies and slammed the doors on the divine forever without ever doing much digging into what might possibly be hidden from view. You went straight from Paul to Nietsche without making any significant stops along the way. Now you pat yourself on the back for being intellectually superior. Then you wonder what that empty feeling inside you could possibly be.
Look, no-one pissed on your religion. But here’s the summary of our side “What that empty feeling is inside.” When I get that feeling, I ussually eat. You went with Jesus… ok, different strokes. I’m an omnitheist, and I believe in everything. I believe that if God exists, he’s an asshole for not coming down here and straightening things out. Ever read “The Barnhouse Effect”? from “Welcome to the Monkey house?” Why can’t god find and disarm the nukes?
I also believe that if he doesn’t maybe humans should know that and realize it’s about time we tried to cover our own asses and helping ourselves out. Maybe that’s overestimating the human capacity, but I’m an optimist.
I expected the food joke.
I`m on my lunch break, so I gotta keep this short.
Presumtuous of you to say that I went with Jesus. I never said I did.
Ah, the old “Why does God allow evil in the world” question. Like I said, it`s my lunch break, so forgive me if I don`t put this quite as beautifully as I can. I think God (the universal intelligence, the omnipresent eternal vibration, however you want to phrase It) wants us to grow up, learn how to handle our own shit, accept the responsibility that comes with power. We can`t do that if God just comes along and wipes our butts every time we soil ourselves. We`ll just be in eternal cosmic diapers. I think you`re right about us helping each other out, I think that`s part of the point, that`s what we`re supposed to learn. That`s what Dr. Vonnegut said, isn`t it? And isn`t that what Hank hinted at when he admitted feeling sympathy for the sufferers of the world?
I gotta go.
Just a quick thought on religion and democracy and why democracy is NOT an ideal form of government.
When given a choice, the people asked to free Barabbas instead of Christ.
By that last comment, I didn’t mean to sound like a “bible thumper”, or whatever derogatory term is going around these days that means “someone who can’t keep their religion in their pants, er, to themselves”, it was just an interesting thought.
Also, I’m not trying to bash democracy, the American government or organized religion. Not that any of those institutions are without flaw.
I believe if you’re gonna bash something, you should be able to back up your negative comment by showing a better way to do it.
Like with that whole “if you don’t vote, you have no right to complain” thing. I’ve solved that. I vote Libertarian. Not that I support the cause, mind you. I just know that the Libertarian candidate isn’t going to win. That way, no matter what… republican or democrat… may happen, I retain my right to complain.
I know I know… I’ll shut up after this post. I just read the post about athiest’s being intellectually superior to the religious. I’ll give my worthless pespective on both sides…
Side ONE: PRO ATHEIST.
Some religious people make themselves appear inferior because they do not question anything. Creationists could be the most intelligent folk on the planet, but they could never prove it to me.
“It says right here in Genesis that he created this on that day…” So, What day did the lord create Apatosaurus again? We’ve got skeletal remains that prove he was here, but it’s not in the book…
Here’s another… people were built to last back in the old testament days, weren’t they? If I recall correctly, Moses lived to be over 900 years old, according to the good book. Or did the earth just orbit the sun faster back then… hmm…
Side TWO: Pro Religious
Ok, now you atheists get to prove how smart you are. You can show me how life on earth came from the sea (according to “Galapogos”, it’s goin’ right back, too) You can tell me how the universe was created. The big bang you say? Makes sense to me.
You can also ask questions like “why can’t God just find and disarm the nukes like prof. Barnhouse?”
Being a christian, well more like a ‘hypochristian’, I can’t give you an answer for that any better than the one you’ve come to hate so much, that God works in mysterious ways.
So not only can you answer the big how questions, you can ask why questions that the religous can’t answer? That makes you superior, eh?
Will since you can prove so many other things, here are a couple more for ya.
1. Explain WHY the big bang occurred.
2. Explain WHY evolution occurred, so that life could continue to flourish on this planet, rather than just die off.
Also, if you do not believe in a god, Christian or otherwise, or life after death and believe that mankind is the highest form of evolution thusfar, not only do you come off as arrogant, you probably need to stay close to a Prozac salt-lick… It’s basically like saying people are the highest form of life in the universe. Geez… if we’re the best the universe has to offer, no wonder it’s so sparsly populated.
last questions:
3. If there is no life after death, and you die tomorrow, then what exactly was the point of living anyway?
4. How can you possibly smile?
So there. Both sides of the debate. I’ve managed to prove neither side right or wrong, just like none of you will either. We’ve been asking these questions ever since we’ve been capable of thought. We ain’t gonna get it now.
Evolutionists? What say we go ask the Dolphins? From what I understand, they are brighter than us anyway…
One last kinda funny thought. Jehova’s witnesses? If there really are only 144,000 people gonna make it to heaven like you say, why the hell are you so active in recruiting? Doesn’t that lessen your chances?
bye…
Mr Vonnegut seems to have learned nothing of the true nature of our society in all these 81 years. He hasn’t learned that socialism is a joke that goes against human nature. That motivation to do evil stems from the oppression that is socialism. That with no system of reward or punishment by our very human nature we are not motivated to do good works. That only in freedom, in true liberty, can things be good and right. I would call him an idiot if I didn’t feel so sorry for him.
Holy crap, Justin. You don’t understand socialism OR liberty, do you? I need to quote Mr. Vonnegut here, from “Fates Worse Than Death.”
“Dear Dean Paul H. Jones —
Our friend Ollie sent me a copy of your letter to him, written immediately after my speech out there.
I am a fourth-generation German-American religious skeptic (“Freethinker”). Like my essentially puritanical forebears, I believe that God has so far been unknowable and hence unservable, hence the highest service one can perform is to his or her community, whose needs are quite evident. I believe that virtuous behavior is trivialized by carrot-and-stick schemes, such as promises of highly improbable rewards or punishments in an improbable afterlife. (The punishment for counterfeiting in Henry VIII’s reign, incidentally, was being boiled alive in public.) The Bible is a useful starting point for discussions with crowds of American strangers, since so many of us know at least a little something about it. It has the added virtue of having for contributors at least two geniuses—Moses and Christ.
Jesus is particularly stimulating to me, since he noticed what I can’t help noticing, that life is so hard most people are losers or feel like losers, so that a skill essential to most of us, if we are to retain some shred of dignity, is to show grace in defeat. That to me is the lesson he taught while up on the cross, whether he was God or not. And he was neither the first nor the last human being, if that is what he was, to teach that while in unbelievable agony.
As for the preaching of formal Christianity, I am all for it. As you saw with your own eyes, I myself have done that, and have done it without pay here in Baghdad on the Subway at the Cathedral of St. John the Divine and St. Clement’s Church. My St. Clement’s sermon can be found at the end of my book Palm Sunday, which also contains my words at Lavina Lyon’s funeral out that way.
What I can’t stand are sermons which say that to believe in the divinity of Jesus is a way towin.
Fraternally yours,
Kurt Vonnegut”
I think it’s a gorgeous sign that so many articulate and educated people post responses to Vonnegut’s articles. I think it is a credit to the type of people he appeals to, as well as how inspiring he is for aspiring writers. I will simply say that reading Vonnegut always makes me feel better. This can be a difficult task in light of all the problems the world faces in combination with the little ones that consume me. Most people, I think, find God or some such entity to assure them that they are not alone, to comfort them, to quiet their hearts and minds. I lack that faith and so lack that outlet. But I always have Vonnegut. He gives form to the feelings and ideas that haunt me, lends me the words that I cannot find. He consistently and effectively reminds me that I am not alone - no faith in the supernatural required. It’s always nice when we can find comfort in other human beings. Why? Because they are both real and readily available. Thank you sir.
you all are retarded. get a life, seriously. no one gives a sh*t about your psuedointellectual garbage. leave your half-wit philosophies to the real authors.
Yeah, so, anyway, ignoring that last comment, well thought-out as it was (In fact the comment seems oddly familiar), it’s nice to see things getting interesting. This thread is actually approaching something resmbling a forum ater all, now that the extremists have had their fun and cooler heads seem to be rising to the surface.
I’d like to stress again the perils of thinking dualistically. Dualities are deceptive oversimplifications. Hence the expression “both sides of the argument” is deceptive, because it suggests being on one side or the other. Like Vonnegut said “What could be simpler?”
Referencing what one or another source of teachings has to say doesn’t make one an adherent of said philosophy. I should be able to consult what Jesus or Moses or Socrates or Mohammed or The Buddha or Confucious or The Dalai Lama or Dick Gregory or Darwin or Sartre or Dostoyevsky or Nietzche or Voltaire or Emerson or Einstein or Jimi Hendrix said about something without being immediately labeled a religious nut or pseudo-philosopher or existentialist or transcendentalist or secular humanist or evolutionist or hippie. Just because I consult what Jesus said doesn’t automatically make me anti-Darwin, nor does my referencing Hawkins make me anti-God.
On the question of “Why Are We Here,” is it any suprise that we might consult what Jesus said? Or the Dalai Lama? Or even Mark Twain or Shakespeare? What’s the hang up?
I don’t know how it is in other countries, but in the U.S., our school reading lists are filled with garbage. No Plato, no Kirkegaard, no Nietzche, no Darwin, no Einstein, no Hawking. DEFinitely no Moses, Jesus, Mohammed, no Confucius, Buddha or Vedas. We avoid addressing the great questions altogether, and only manage to skirt them by assigning an endless list of fiction to our students. Pride and Prejudice, Great Gatsby, Wuthering Heights, Great Expectations. It’s a safe way to avoid conflicts of church and state, and so most Americans know next to nothing about the dialogues of Socrates, or the writings of Einstein. No understanding of the influence of the spread of Christianity on Middle Eastern and European thought, or of the spread of Islam centuries later.
To misunderstand the history of religion and philosophy is to misunderstand human history itself. Questions of what we’re doing and how we got here cannot be addressed with any degree of accuracy without an understanding of the development of religious and philosophical thought. They are one and the same. The development of religion and philosophy are so closely tied to the development of our cultures, our politics, even our languages. Ignoring these influences is like trying to understand poetry without an understanding of the language it’s written in.
Thanks to Mr. Vonnegut for sharing his wisdom once again. How is it that within moments of beginning to read his essay, I found myself transported to that very place his writing always transports me—a state of sad comfort where a light shines on the ugliness and by doing so, makes our possibilities beautiful? I can only hope that in my little run on this planet I can come to understand as he does, and in my turn, share it with others who may need it. And so it goes . . . .
EVERYBODY!!! Just shut the f**k up already and go live your lives! All these posts don’t make the world ANY better. If you think you have “a better way” then just go live your life as an example to those around you.
Hey mrandmrsjohnqfruitcakes,
“...now that the extremists have had their fun and cooler heads seem to be rising to the surface.
I’d like to stress again the perils of thinking dualistically. Dualities are deceptive oversimplifications.”
This is an understatement from the man/woman him/herself. You started posting as “mrandmrsjohnq” and after a bit of bonding you changed to “mister fruitcakes”. Now you call yourself “mrandmrsjohnqfruitcakes” and refer to yourself and others as “cooler heads”
Two words that come to mind is WANKER and SCHIZOPHRENIA.
“A little reminder. The reason you are reading this, and perhaps posting here, is because you clicked on a little link titled “discuss this topic.” The “topic” is a piece which mentions Jesus and Christianity quite frequently in its context. It’s irrational to ask everyone to leave it out of the equation. I respectfully submit that you may be in the wrong thread.”
MrWister you missed the point of my post. Nothing new as allot of people have said a lot and others have missed the point, including myself. Maybe this site has distilled the cooler heads and some progress is being made. Maybe not.
Where do we come from? – who the #### cares. Where are we going? – with what we know about our past we should have a fair idea, but lets get on with killing each other over religion or whatever is al la mode as there is evidently nothing in history to contradict this.
History is written by the victors, so what would make any bible immune from this statement. Anything that man lays his fingers on turns to shit. I question our rank in the food chain or our intellect.
We are insecure as a species. It comes with the territory. Look at the bible and the threat that if you do not believe in God you are doomed to everlasting hell filled with fire… Leave it be people.
We are wasting life’s precious seconds on reaching for something that is just out of our reach. Everything we need is in front of us. Dim witted people like BUSH and other like him do not have the balls to accept that as the challenge. No imagination and it is easier to get peoples attention through terror then to do good. Charity begins at home, BUSH and others like him ignore the concept.
To all you posters. Stop the talk and do the walk. Get of your lazy asses and do some good. Start by getting your current dick out of the White House. Before and after that do something that makes you feel better. Help an old lady, give someone a gap on the road, get a tin of food and share it amongst the stray cats and dogs in your area. Donate a F9/11 dvd to someone who has not seen it. Sit a republican down and tell him that you also need to take a shit from time to time and that you do sleep at night. Ask him/her to pinch you so that they KNOW you are real just like them. Pinch them and know that they are real people with real concerns, instead of bashing each other over a fuck nut like BUSH.
Mister Fruitcake, for the record, I personally enjoy pulling my wire so no hard feelings. I also am a Gemini. Probably a bit schizophrenic. Too much grass I guess or dagga as its called back home.
I read a book by Stephen King recently “ Hearts in Atlantis”. Allot of the book takes part around the Vietnam story. If Kings portrayal about how people protested and questioned why the troops were there, it sounds like history repeated itself in Vietnam. The war in Iraq was before Vietnam, right? Or have we learnt nothing from history. This makes your last statement Mister Fruitcake redundant.
First things first, Vonnegut was one of my favorite authors in my formative days. No no, to all the life begins at conception people ... I’m not talking about my gametogenesis ... simply early manhood ( please note that I’ve incorporated the more techno popular double dot dot dot into my writings rather than the double dash that Mr. Vonnegut prefers - but the parentheses are his ) - um ... forgive the subsequent dashes. Anyway, it seems to me that the article of his - this WAS inspired by his article wasn’t it? - ( Damn it! I just used “his” double dashes and now because of it, I’ve now burned up all my alloted parentheses for this retort ) triggered many eclectic responses, with many points of view, from many a bright mind. Whether these opinions are in agreement or in opposition ( note that I used the more fanciful word to support the negative, thus giving it a greater call to attention ) - and now I’ve exceeded my parenthesis use! - the one thing that strikes me is the underpinning of anger in most of the prose. He writes his article, as many good writers do, from an obvious point of view. One could argue that journalists should be mandatorily objective and that they should be excluded from my preceding sentence, but why beat that dead horse when it no longer even looks like a mammal. Anyway it seems to me that the content of the article stirred some debate, but the perspective of the author and subsequent writers facilitated a much more vehement ( or is it vociferous? ) discussion. This was just a mere observation I wanted to share. I have no thoughts to share on the origin of zero, no expositions on Christ, Moses or Confuscious, and no specific ramblings on Bush, Kerry, Moe or Curly; they’ve all been previously discussed with great detail, enthusiasm, and yes ... anger. I guess in closing does anyone else wonder from time to time if the world be better if our journalists’ commentaries included the penis sizes of Mr. Bush, Mr. Kerry, Saddam and Bin Laden? Maybe not. But it would make me smile. Maybe you would too.
And so it goes.
Well said, halincoh, but, relevant as it may be, I would never joke about a man’s penis size, for fear of the possibility of reincarnation.
No hard feelings, Watson. Wank your wire all you want. It beats making war.
As for killing each other over religion, well, wars are historically fought over cold hard cash. Religion just makes a useful tool for convincing people to go to war.
I haven’t read Hearts in Atlantis, but King was alive during the Vietnam era. If you are interested, I highly reccomend researching some of the wealth of nonfiction dedicated to the “Indochina Wars,” as the U.S. government officially refers to them. It’s powerful stuff. And HELL YES people protested! Are you talking about U.S. people? OF COURSE we protested! I get the impression from your post that this is the first you’ve heard of it, and if that’s true, it’s a hell of an eye-opener for me. What do citizens of the world think, that all Americans were in favor of the war in Vietnam?? Reading some pulp fiction reference to the protests is the first you’ve heard of them? That really troubles me.
The Vietnam conflict tore the U.S. apart. People rose up in protest constantly, and it wasn’t this lying-around-in-the-street-in-my-Ray-Bans-with-my-water-bottle, or I’m-going-to-show-everybody-my-tits-and-ass-and-then-they’ll-stop-the-war style protest. People were furious about what Johnson and Nixon were doing over there. They shouted at the tops of their lungs, knowing the police were coming with tear gas, dogs, and clubs. The police were generally more brutal back then than they are now. The protesters knew what they were in for, were clubbed, tear-gassed, and went to jail in droves. Young men burned their draft cards, and veterans returning home tore off their medals and hurled them to the ground. The anti-war movement was so strong it became a target of the FBI’s domestic counterintelligence ops. Protest groups were spied on, infiltrated, and disrupted. Their leaders were defamed, framed, harassed, and arrested. They were often arrested on fraudulent charges at specific times, like just before they were about to lead a protest; by the time they were cleared of charges, they had missed their appointments.
I could go on and on. But I’ve learned something new today. That’s what happens when people talk and listen to each other. Thake that, Smith. And calm down, too. I’ll say it once again, you’re reading this because you clicked on a link that said “discuss this topic.” What kind of a discussion is it if everyone just shuts the f**k up?
I counter, everybody DON’T shut the f**k up!
OPEN UP!
One last thing, I need a clarification from Watson. I don’t get what you mean by “This makes your last
statement Mister Fruitcake redundant.” Can you clear that up for me? I’m sorry to trouble you, I’m a little slow, what with all the voices in my head.
All spelling errors are typos. And, to clarify, I have nothing against nudity. I’m for it. I was just drawing a contrast between the protesters of today and those of the ‘60s and ‘70s.
“I’ve often wondered, Deacon Ball, if atheism might even be popular with God himself.”
—The Night Thoreau Spent in Jail
Of course in old age and when pushed against the wall, all the quest for truth and pushing away bs goes down the drain; its the time to just claim adherence to a religion. In his case, christianity. What about what christianity has done against human beings since its begining? How many MILLIONS of people were killed, tortured and/or mentally raped because of the man that they worship?
Please, Mr. Vonnegut, I have been impressed with your writings until now, but I’d suggest you keep the ‘dirty little secret’ of what you cling to as belief, in the closet. Otherwise the basis of all your writings is exposed as a fraud- for after all, he has some ultimate little secret platform that he uses when push comes to shove.
I am not suggesting a man be without belief, but I am saying that someone writing as you do should keep his personal belief to himself. Actually, I believe seeing you say that- religion is between you and your Creator…
It’s essential in fairness and accuracy to separate Jesus from Christianity. Jesus never killed, tortured, or raped ANYbody. He never told anybody to do it, either, directly or indirectly. He instructed people to love God and love each other.
Mrvoicesinmymrsheadcakes,
History is the result of our actions, recorded by humans for future generations. It’s a one sided tale heaping glory on one and denying another. The last thing that history is is fair. The bible and the story of Jesus is no exception. Even this has had to stand mans meandering ways. And above all history is a general depiction of events. As about as general as my attempt to define the word and the significance that accompanies this word or the event.
History should for all that it is worth steer us clear of all the misery that we find ourselves in today. But it does not. Why is that. That’s why I said your last paragraph is redundant. Understanding history makes about as much sense as trying to predict a years supply of weather forecasts.
We find the time to entertain all kinds of atrocities after world war II and we still have not learnt a single thing, except of course that that the Germans were really bad and every one swears that they will never forget. Crap. We will forget, we forgot every significant event before world war II came along. We will forget and we will make the same mistakes over again.
Jesus was a good guy that got manipulated by man. Yes its man that kills in the name of Jesus. So take away that name which man uses all to often. I am not suggesting that religion be banned from peoples lifes. I am suggesting that people like you and me, like Kurt and this article, like a Jew or an Arab keep his faith between him and his god. There is absolutely no justification for any human being across the globe to publicly show off his her faith, including this article. Do we want only Christians to discuss the topic or would folk from lets say Iraq or Bombay or Angola also be welcome given their ethnic back rounds or their preferences concerning religion. The logic is as inhumanly bad as the missionaries going to blackest Africa to convert the natives.
Religion kills mate. Its the number one reason. Money is second. Get people to believe and soon you have a steady income of cash, blood and violence.
On this site allot of people are confused upset and simply pissed off. Like Smith who wants people to just shut up and get on with it. Well he or she is right. This is a discussion site. Allot of people do think hard before they speak and allot gets said and even more makes sense and yet we are no better off for it or are we?
What have you done Mr Wister since joining this site that is useful (besides your words of wisdom) what have you done that resembles good. What have all of you done.
I believe that we are good. Man is good and needs to do good else he poisons himself. We are good, so do something that is good.
I new about Vietnam before reading the book “Hearts in Atlantis”, it just struck me as being co-incidental that the book should be stating what we are going through at the moment. It would be good for Americans to read the book and wonder back to a time in history where you were faced with the same dilemma. That would give people a surreal perspective I am sure.
Also read “ The Source” by James Mitchener. Very good book about the Jewish faith and how it got the wrong end of the stick against Christianity and or Islam which by the way is regarded as the natural evolution of Christianity.
‘...the greatest man that ever lived…’
This is offensive to me, and I’d assume offensive to many of his readers. To many, this was a man who may have had some good intentions, even if they were misguided; but he was most certainly not the greatest man that ever lived, nor the religion that was created after him anything to hold holy. Besides for that man himself, reference to him as a diety is not at all in the spirit of Kurt’s original writings. This is my primary point: regardless of what you think of Christianity, for Kurt to ‘fall back’ on the one liner that all fundamentalist Christians use is not excusable, in my opinion. He was a writer that endeavored to display the truth the way it is, period. Not belief in some man from 2000 years ago. And he did not aim to push people into a religion that puts people into a cage, as Christianity does (original sin, the pathetic concept of trinity, virgin mary etc etc…)
If you believe in the Creator, then DO and THINK as He wishes of you, do not just create a cult (ie. we believe such and such, lets now convince others to believe the same.)
In my opinion it is wrong- absolutely wrong- for him to mention the founder (not really the founder, but theoretically) of that religion, when what he has always written contradicts this idea. Might it be a revelation of what he has always held deep down? Might he be a complete fraud, because he always had this as his core belief? I dont know, but he should keep his little secrets to himself.
I think you’re all going a bit ‘round the bend. If you’ve read as much Vonnegut as you claim to have read, you’d know that he has always acknowledged Jesus as a real person. He has always expressed doubts about Jesus’s divinity. And he has always maintained that the primary error of Christianity was to place too much focus on the messenger and not the message. To Kurt, formal Christianity involves preaching the basic philosphy of Jesus, a philosophy, by the way, that was not at all original except perhaps in the phrasing (telling people the positive things they should do, rather than the negative things they should not). This does not make Vonnegut a closet Christian, but rather a humanist who can separate the wheat from the chaff of most religions and glean those things that are worthy of our consideration. ALL religious texts are the works of humans. Weed out the metaphysical mumbo jumbo and obvious bigotries, and you get some compelling suggestions on how to get through this thing, whatever it is. Thomas Jefferson tried to do this when he cut and pasted the New Testament (which, by the way, if you take Revelations seriously, ensured our Tom eternal damnation). Make no mistake: Kurt has been and will always be a humanist.
Organized religion in the hands of the wise can serve as a template for benevolent behavior. However, if power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely, then any VERY powerful, especially an extremist, form of organized religion in the hands of a fool functions as nothing more than a hot plate for a deadly combination for self righteous, self serving, and malicious behavior elevating corruption to frequently catastrophic levels. This world has far too many fools. For a vehement treatment on religious fanatacism from a deliciously warped and dark mind, please see Chuck Palahniuk’s SURVIVOR.
Okay ... if penis sizes of our world leaders , good and bad, past and present, ala Breakfast of Champions, doesn’t float your boat, how ‘bout the 21st century of such nonsense: bobble head dolls! You could collect them all: Saddam, Bin Laden, Bush, Kerry, Moses, Muhammad, Jesus, Cheney ( GOTTA have a Cheney! ), Cal Ripken, Garfield ( the dead president, not the cat ), Col Sanders, Martin Luther King, Eddie Van Halen, and Carrot Top. All yours for only $99.99. For those with no penises $79.95. Call today!
Ah Kurt Vonnegut’s dark humor at its finest. Yet he has a very valid point. We are all just hypocrites about to pay the price for our lifestyles. Violence on TV, both fiction and non-fiction, the rich making money off of EVERYTHING they can, and our dense red neck president trying to prove something. All I can say is don’t you just love America?
Now that you all feel better….turn off your televisions, talk to your neighbors, and ride a bicycle whenever you can to do simple errands and commutes.
Just when this discussion is getting interesting again, my computer crashes. Thanks, Symantec.
Wanna throw in a couple of relevant points, here:
Learning history is not the same as learning FROM history. Your example of the Third Reich makes a decent example. You said the only thing we learned was that the Germans were really bad. But the lesson many agree is worth taking from the Nazis is that all of us have the potential for being “really bad.” Anyone who ever took a basic psychology class will remember the now-famous experiment conducted by Stanley Milgram in the early ‘60s that demonstrated everyday people’s willingness to torture people when commanded to do so, even as their victims screamed for mercy. Anyone who doesn’t know what I’m talking about should do a quick keyword search for an eye-opener. We make a tragic mistake when we refuse to face the fact that the men and women who became the Nazis were not dragons or faeries, they were normal everyday people. We like to think of them as somehow different from the rest of us because that way we can avoid confronting the reality that that same potential for evil rests inside us. We ignore such a lesson at our peril, by vainly refusing to accept this valuable lesson, we doom ourselves to the repeat of history. ( COUGHguantanomoAHEM)
As for the assertion that religion kills. I’ll retort by asserting that we humans seem quite capable of killing each other regardless of the presence or absence of religion.
Mass murder rape torture looting and destruction with religion:
Crusades
Columbus
Spanish Inquisition
Israel/Palestine
Mass murder rape torture looting and destruction without religion:
Stalin
Khmer Roughe
Mao
Third Reich
Seems to me the mass murderers just use religion when it’s convenient or necessary, like when the people who they’re trying to send into the battlefield are religious, meaning their leaders have to somehow convince them that their god really wants them to go to war.
Schizocakes makes (make) a good point. I would only add that Hitler also believed he was doing God’s work (see “Mein Kampf”).
I ask you all to read Laurence Britt’s article “Fascism Anyone?”
http://www.secularhumanism.org/library/fi/britt_23_2.htm
and see if you don’t agree we (America) are all stumbling headlong into fascism.
Lenny, I think your comment betrays a lack of understanding. In all of Jesus’ recorded teachings, there is no mention of him saying anything about the divine trinity, the original sin, or the immaculate conception. All of that was tacked on later. After almost 2000 years, people are still debating, disagreeing, and accusing each other of heresy over stuff like talking snakes, pregnant virgins, and trinities, when in fact, after nearly 2000 years of revisions, invasions, translations, politics, and heretics(alleged), in all of what is now accepted as the record of what Jesus said, (the Russian Orthodox, Catholic, King James, Good News, or any other version), Jesus supposedly never placed ANY importance on ANY of that stuff! Isn’t that interesting? Pick up any old Bible sometime and read all the red text. That’s the stuff Jesus supposedly said. Hint: it won’t take you long. And don’t be afraid. Just reading it doesn’t automatically make you a Jesus freak. You’ll be suprised at the difference between the garbage that reactionary fundamentalists shout in your ear and what’s actually written there on the page. Blaming Jesus for the Jerry Falwells and Columbuses of the world is like blaming Muhammad for the bin Ladens and Farrakhans.
I also think that if Vonnegut had mentioned ANY other person, Gandhi, Socrates, Jim Henson, even Muhammad, Gotama or Krishna, as being the greatest man that ever lived, you would not have felt compelled to write about finding it offensive. I accept the possibility that I could be dead wrong. Maybe you would have been just as offended and would have said as much. But I don’t think so. And we’ll never really know, will we? Only you know. I think I’m right, though.
I ask again. Why, in a discussion of “Why we’re here” must we refrain from referencing teachers whose teachings developed into religions? Pythagorus founded a religion, do I have to refrain from referencing him, too? Maybe we should remove the pythagorean theorem from our children’s textbooks lest they be exposed and corrupted.
How ‘bout religious leaders? I guess if I found anything Dr Martin Luther King Jr had to say useful, I had better just keep that nasty little secret to myself.
Why do we oppress ourselves this way?
One last thing before this net cafe closes, I think you speak volumes, Watson, in stating that everything we need and need to do is right in front of us.
And the Wister thing is going over my head. What does it mean?
Mr Wister I believe comes from a S. King novel. There is no significance attached to why I call you that other than for the fact that your names are long and change the whole time. Laziness on my part. From now on I will make sure I keep up with the times mrandmrsCAKE.
“Learning history is not the same as learning FROM history.” You are correct. I should have realised this and make the connection with a little story that I keep remembering.
An old man can sit his grandson down and tell him about all the things in life that he should avoid. Knowing this though, will not help the kid. Knowing the future in such general terms will not really help the kid unless he is traumatised by what his grand father says. I am a firm believer in making mistakes to learn from them. Obviously some mistakes are worth avoiding and then there are some mistakes the we would do best to experience.
What then is the purpose of history. To lets us know that we are all capable of doing extreme good as well as doing some very awful things to each other? In the case of Hitler this would serve as you say as a reminder to all of us that we are capable of doing exactly the same or worse. Two things that come to my mind are that one we are living in a science lab experimenting on different scenarios. We are therefore the scientists and mice at the same time. And two, Hitler and human beings like him are just the messengers. Sure nobody asked them to carry out what they did, but they proved a point. The experiment was successful. And this can also therefore be said about Bush. Until now his experiment is going according to plan and again he is the messenger and the results are quite clear. We are all capable of doing some really awful stuff. And if we are not then we are certainly capable of endorsing these actions. I am not sure which is worse. The scientist experimenting or the sponsors. I personally would go with the sponsors as being worse.
In the second world war the one country that shocked me more than Germany would be Italy. The Italians sided with Hitler because they were cowards. Protecting their own interests by siding with the one ideology that would ultimately claim their freedom anyway. You could respect Hitler because you know where you stood with him, but not a coward.
At the end of the day, what Bush is doing is clearly creating awareness and allot of good can come from this. So how do we the inhabitants of planet earth, how do you liberals, democrats, republicans learn from this and make the right choices. What are the right choices? Everything has two sides to it. Any choice has good and bad in it. It would be fair to say though that whatever choice is made, the first action that should come out of this is that human life is not called into question. And I am not talking about shoot now and lets ask questions later as in Bush’s case. By making sure that human life is priority number one, you can not go wrong, especially if it is you who are occupying another country. To all the republican folk out there, think about that.
JANE ELLIOTT, one of Americas greatest gifts to the world. For those of you who have not heard of her, she carried out an experiment about 30 years ago in a class room. The experiment was to make half of the class of young kids believe that they were superior to the other by the colour of the kids eyes. So if you had brown eyes you were dumb and if you had blue eyes you were smart. Well the experiment worked. The one thing that J. Elliott mentions in the film as part of the story is the following.
As an example she used Hitler as the monster who had captured thousands of people from all over the world. He and the SS paid periodical visits and took prisoners to the gas chambers. The story unfolds like this.
“… When they (Hitler’s and the SS) came for the French, I was not French so I did nothing.
When they came for the Italians, I was not Italian, so I did nothing.
When they came for the Polish, I was not Polish so I did nothing.
When they came for the Americans, I was not American so I did nothing.
When they came for the Jews, I was not Jewish and therefore did nothing, and when they came for me there was nobody left to help me…”
This little story should serve to remind all of us at this moment that they (us being the Scientists) are coming for us and we need all of you to help make sure the right choices are made.
http://www.horizonmag.com/4/jane-elliott.asp
I apologise for not addressing all of the good points made above in other posts. This has become a bit of a take what you want and post what you want site without really focusing on all the valid points made. I am certainly one of them.
And lastly, maybe religion is not responsible for being the number one killer, but it is sure as hell used allot to create an association between what people hold dear and the eminent threat. AkA “Axis of Evil”
mrandmrsCAKE,
Is this the end of the line? No more posts or no more interest and therefore no more posts.
*****************************************
Good Judgement comes from experience, and
experience comes from bad judgement.
*****************************************
Perhaps the Federal Government should be run like a Reality Show. George “monkeyman” Bush could then be voted off the island by the poplar vote at any time.
It’s already happened in the land of fruits and nuts, so why not DC?
My computer’s still fried. Too bad, like I said before.
I have more to say and I’m sure other people do, too. Just have limited access to the net. Enough about me, though.
This thread seems to go through lulls, periods of high and low activity. I wouldn’t give up.
I agree with what you said about the school of experience. I also am a firm believer in it.
However…
We aren’t children, we are adults (I assume) and our cognitive processes are different, to a certain degree.
I want to expand on this thought…later.
Meanwhile just call me Sybil
Kurt,
Just thought I’d let you know that I’m nineteen, I’ve been inspired by you for years, and I’m going to change the world for the better.
I’m a writer too you see, though I haven’t published anything (come to think of it I haven’t even really written anything big), and I just thought you’d like to know that, yes, the world is filled with morons and pretentious fucks…but there’s still hope.
Thankyou for speaking to us, the world I mean, especially those future thinkers of the world who sometimes feel lonely.
Truly,
Michael
All right man!! Kurt Vonnegut smoked a J!! I wanted to find out if he ever did for a while.
“Here’s what I think the truth is: We are all addicts of fossil fuels in a state of denial, about to face cold turkey.”
A little poetic license here. We’re not about to run out of oil, we’re about to hit Hubert’s Peak—the top of the bell shaped oil production curve.
The U.S. hit Hubert’s peak in 1970 at around 10 million barrels a day. Now we produce barely over half that.
The Energy Information Agency, which keeps track of these things, puts out a monthly report of the oil production in 30 countries plus a catch-all “other.” Of those, 12 are now in decline, inlcuding such major producers as Norway, the United Kingdom, Indonesia, and Venezuela. Altogether these 12 countries are 8 million barrels a day below their peak production. Last year alone they lost over a million barrels a day of production.
With every new country that rolls over into decline, it makes it that much harder for the remaining countries to replace the loss plus keep up with increasing demand (lately lead by the Chinese who want they’re own auto indutry just like us.)
The Saudis sent a chill through the market recently when, after promising to increase their production, all they could come up with some very poor grade, heavy oil. The Suadi’s were supposed to be able to carry the load for several more decades. But like all OPEC countries, the Saudis lie about how much oil they have left.
Something to think about this Turkey Day.
Jus wanna say that it was NOT the Arabs who came up wid the zero and algebra, it was an Indian Mathmatician named ARYABHATTA.
Well, how ‘bout that. It’s been over two years. ‘Feels like twice that. I remember what stopped this discussion. It was the outcome of the November 2004 election. Stopped us all dead in our tracks. At least that’s how I’ve always seen it. I’ve often thought about checking back in, maybe rekindling the discussion and seeing how people have been affected by all that’s gone under the bridge since then. It was a pretty good group we had, as discussion boards go. I have to hand it to “In These Times” for keeping the line open. Anybody else out there from the old crew? Maybe Mr. Vonnegut’s passing will bring new posts and new thoughts to the table.
Well, I do recall that, somewhere within the course of the past two years, I finally came to understand and see the truth of this:
“There is a tragic flaw in our precious Constitution, and I don
register a new account »Posting Security