Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by zimv20, Aug 6, 2003.
I believe that http://www.lewrockwell.com has a link to a compendium of Kwiatkowski's essays and columns. In one there is a link to many Pentagon-specific articles she's written.
Seems like a sharp lady.
It's what we have been hearing all along - they stake a position and look for evidence to justify it. They will either manipulate, censor or classify data when it does not support their neo-con views. This is typical of corporate liars.
among my many job hats was hiring for the company i used to co-own. my greatest lesson learned: what people have done in past jobs, they will continue to do after hire.
wwworry, it's not just Neocons. It's any group with an agenda outside the political mainstream. PETA, folks like the Clinton-staff gal they just caught (see WND, today), this particular batch of Neocons, many of the anti-gun crowd (VPC, e.g.)...
zimv20, you're surely righteous! Leopards ain't into the spot-changing routine.
Rat - I read her essay on the neocon occupation. far different tone than that op-ed in the chronicle!
you're right, she seems very sharp. are there any other essays of hers on that site that you recommend?
I tend to go read through all the archives of somebody who gets my attention with any one article. I haven't yet done this with her, but I've read several. About all I can say is to gut up and go for it.
Another person worth reading, although there's a lot of repetition, is Hackworth. A current interview is quite explanatory: http://www.commondreams.org/views03/0805-09.htm I can believe Hack on a good bit of his comments; our logistics support in South Korea during my tour of occupation duty in 1954/1955 differed only in that we did get mail...
wow! that hackworth interview was pretty raw. they mentioned all the heat he took recently - has he gotten a lot of mainstream attention? i guess i haven't been paying enough attention. this quote from the field struck me:
this reminds me of some quote from tariq aziz a few years back, when asked if he saw the light at the end of the tunnel regarding sanctions: "we do not see the light at the end of the tunnel. there is a tunnel after the tunnel."
Sorry, 'Rat, read the Kwiatkowski essay and it sounds like Libertarian silliness to me. In particular, it is just plain bad anthropology when she says:
"A thriving free market is the natural state of human association and human action. It is people inspired and free to create, trade and preserve things that have value to themselves and others, through an unrestricted, often indirect, access to millions of other unique and valuable people. A free market is not, as the reporters sentence intimates, a cultural quality, somehow found in the soil or water or gene pool of a particular vicinity. It is not something we have to plant and nurture like some hypersensitive orchid. If it were, of course the statement becomes even more asinine, as the Tigris Euphrates basin could teach the rest of the world a few things about the free market, given they have been doing it for thousands of years minus some relatively short-term interruptions by external conquerors and domestic socialist tyrants"
Free markets have nothing to do with the way most all of band societies operate. It is in these societies, that are closer to socialist types of economies, in which most of human history is organized. Not to say that market economies haven't proved to be highly efficient. Kwiatowski's ideological agenda gets in the way of some good observations.
Wasn't thinking of her non-Pentagon stuff, just her commentaries from within that Pleasure Dome. Expertise in one area does not guarantee expertise in another.
Movie stars come immediately to mind, of course. And lawyers...
Hackworth got disgusted with the way things were being done in Vietnam, with all the CYA and waste. He resigned his commission and spent the next 20 years in Australia. He came back to the states some five or six years (IIRC) back, and started writing columns for Soldier of Fortune magazine. He then started his website. He coined the phrase, "Perfumed Princes of the Pentagon", referring to the bureaucratic generals as opposed to the warrior generals. He's like Chesty Puller or Patton, putting the welfare of the grunts ahead of the welfare of the REMFs.
OK, 'Rat, I'll try her Pentagon stuff. Funny how movie stars pop into the mind right now when thinking about the wisdom of your statement on expertise. I hope to not have to test out the truth of your wisdom come October.
Sayhey said, "Free markets have nothing to do with the way most all of band societies operate."
Well, yeah, internal to the band. It's when they deal with other bands that the free market comes into play.
As to the Tigris/Euphrates basin, the bazaar is indeed a free market, and that's where bazaars began. Today, we have flea markets, craft shows and garage sales. Everything else, some government agency adds to the cost.
A band society can survive socialism, or benefit from socialism, because it doesn't tolerate the sick/lame/lazy as permanent-condition voters. When you get well on toward 300 million people, socialism leads to bankruptcy.
The reason "free markets' thrived 3000 (??) years ago in the Tigris/Euphrates basin was because of the existence of government. Government set laws that allowed predictabilty of outcome, set monetary standards, had some sort of police so that the strongest would not just take what they wanted, etc.
There is no free "natural" market. It is a social construct. We have even seen that the concept of land ownership is not exactly "natural".
As for socialism, all governments are in some degree socialistic. They just differ in amount. There has been much demonizing of socialism without much thought given to the consequences of it's removal. I think there is a place in America for libertarians as a pole, just as socialists are needed to combat/feed and sustain libertarian ideals. Middle ground is enriched by both and others.
Internal to the band is how these societies survive - cooperatively. My phrase, "socialist types of economies" is probably not a good one. There is this tendency of people to look back into history and try and project back their values and ideas as "natural." Marx and Engels did it with their views on "primitive communism" and Libertarians do it with "free markets." In reality the type of organizations that band societies are structured around have little to do with modern capitalist or socialist concepts.
I agree with wwworry's observation that, "There is no free 'natural' market. It is a social construct. We have even seen that the concept of land ownership is not exactly 'natural.'" The diversity of cultural adaptions in forming societies are as varied as the number of cultures.
here's an oped from krugman in today's nytimes - relates to this. i'll post the whole thing since you need to register to read it.
"It's deja vu all over again!"
I was in charge of distribution of food to the batteries in my ack-ack battalion in Korea, '54-'55. A truckload would come in from QM at Yong Dong Po to Bn Hq, and I had to figure out how to split stuff five ways. Not easy when butter came in one-gallon cans--and you got four of them. Or how to split three fifty-pound bags of flour, five ways. (I got the job because I was the only peon in the outfit who could use a slide rule.)
Small-size boots were stolen out of the QM main warehouse and sold on the black market. Our Korean soldiers were commonly danged near barefooted in their wornout boots..."Back order."
Being shorted on toilet paper might sound funny--unless you've been there.
And today's WND has more from Hackworth, but it merely adds some more specifics to an unending list: http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=34043
Nothing's changed since Kipling wrote about Tommy.
as i mentioned earlier, the "it's always been this bad" arguments are sounding empty.
Cripes, just when I think it's gotten as bad as it can get, it always seems to get a little worse.
Incidentally, this same "privatization" deal is going down in the National Park Service. And why you ask? Certainly not because it's cheaper to provide the services this way. No, it's because federal employees are unionized and the unions support Democrats. The corporations who are replacing them make campaign contributions to Republicans.
Ah patronage, sweet patronage!
zim, tired or not, empty or not, facts are still facts. The problem is, nobody seems to have been able to fix it, no matter who promises to do so. I've been fortunate enough to get the occasional one-on-one with various elected types. I'll bring up some problem of this general sort. The standard answer seems to be, "Yeah, you're right, but..." Occasionally I've found that a bill to address a problem had already been introduced, but went nowhere in committee or sub-committee.
IJ, I live next to Big Bend National Park. SFAIK, the only privately-done work is in the Concessions--and that's been the case nationwide, for decades. (Plus such things as road or building construction.) Could you expound a bit?
i don't want to dismiss any "always like this" argument out of hand, but it's been used an awful lot lately (and not just by you).
certainly, there's 'nothing new under the sun.' but to pretend things aren't bad because one has seen it before isn't a valid line of reasoning, imo.
some years, chicago has upwards of 1000 murders. that doesn't make the hundreds so far this year okay.
True, zim, but the tone is often that of "Oh! Isn't this horrible!" as though it's all brand new. More energy is expended in the "tut-tutting" than in possible options.
Maybe it's the sameness without change that's led to so much cynicism. You try and fight to correct stuff, and get all manner of good words--and nothing changes. It's frustrating.
All manner of promises during election campaigns, and I as a voter am supposed to be wise and knowing. After the election, the promises are forgotten and I'm treated as though I'm too stupid to pound sand.
What are we to do? Get all 300 million of us into fulltime politics?
all true, and i have no easy answers. it seems to me the voting public gets stupider all the time.
voting in schwarzenegger will seal it. if he refuses to state any concrete position and still gets voted in... wtf does _that_ say?
Rumor has it that living in California lowers one's IQ by two points per year. Possibly this election will prove it...
let's not jump the gun just yet, but yeah, if this turns out to be the case, maybe i'll join george lucas and say that benevolent despot is the way to go.
Sure, some services at national parks have been run by concessionaires for literally a century now -- but this is new policy, Bush administration stuff. Type "privatization national park service" into google and you'll get lots of hits. You can start with this one.
Incidentally, I'm in a position to possibly make money off of this deal -- but it's money I don't want to make.