The Crow's Eye: As Thunder Rumbles, From An Undetermined Distance

"...it's not the training to be mean but the training to be kind that is used to keep us leashed best." ~ Black Dog Red

"In case you haven't recognized the trend: it proceeds action, dissent, speech." ~ davidly, on how wars get done

"...What sort of meager, unerotic existence must a man live to find himself moved to such ecstatic heights by the mundane sniping of a congressional budget fight. The fate of human existence does not hang in the balance. The gods are not arrayed on either side. Poseiden, earth-shaker, has regrettably set his sights on the poor fishermen of northern Japan and not on Washington, D.C. where his ire might do some good--I can think of no better spot for a little wetland reclamation project, if you know what I mean. The fight is neither revolution nor apocalypse; it is hardly even a fight. A lot of apparatchiks are moving a lot of phony numbers with more zeros than a century of soccer scores around, weaving a brittle chrysalis around a gross worm that, some time hence, will emerge, untransformed, still a worm." ~ IOZ

Aug 2, 2011

As Thunder Rumbles, From An Undetermined Distance

The contemporary likelihood of an event or set of events communicates little to nothing about the comparative value of an outcome one might prefer.

6 comments:

Landru said...: I'm choosing to take this personally*.

I yearn for simpler times when we could just Punch a Motherfucker. Not that either you or the rumbler qualifies as the receiving end, in my humble view. But surely, surely there is a motherfucker to be found to absorb our ire, no?

Warmth.

*No, I'm not. Clocks are funny, though.; August 2, 2011 at 5:42 PM
Anonymous said...: I found thunder's snark indicative of victimhood and comfort in that status.; August 2, 2011 at 10:23 PM
ifthethunderdontgetya™³²®© said...: If you want to tell people "that Social Security that you like so much?...it's just an evil tool of the plutocracy", then you have to explain what will be better for them if they didn't have it.

Or at least, why their sacrifice will be worth it for the greater good. And that's going to be tougher.
~; August 2, 2011 at 11:11 PM
Anonymous said...: jesus

it's not Jack's fault the SuperCongress is doing what it's doing

does being such an obtuse, clueless cock come naturally to you?; August 2, 2011 at 11:41 PM
Abonilox said...: I think I missed part of this, but I disagree that Mr. Crow is obliged to "explain what will be better for them if they didn't have [Social Security]".

Stating a fact about a particular state of affairs does not oblige the speaker to provide an alternative.; August 3, 2011 at 1:23 AM
Jack Crow said...: I'm simply suggesting that the likelihood of an outcome says nothing about why or how one should preference it.

To argue that social security or the Presidency aren't going to abolished any time soon, so therefore the real struggle should be how to make them better is to limit the debate to begging for scraps from those who control both.; August 5, 2011 at 8:39 AM

Post a Comment

This one took a while to put into words.

I don't kid myself that I've stumbled upon a unique insight and I have little doubt that someone has already written or said this better than I. Five minutes after I hit the "publish" button, I'll probably regret the choice of words more than I already do now - because it's difficult to get my head outside of English language usage, to comment on a problem with that usage, whilst using the English language to do so.

In the interest of not making more of an ass of myself than necessary, I've pared a very long thesis down to a paragraph:

I find it troubling that, using English, I have very limited choice in expressing how I relate to people with whom I have ongoing interaction. If I want to reference the nature of my relations with the woman who has challenged me to grow in ways I never imagined possible, the woman who howled with a primal, gorgeous, earth shattering, mother bear of a refrain, transcending pain and pleasure in act of creation to which I will never be immediate party, who has with her defiant and proud womanhood still intact forged a family out of disparate parts - I have to write "my wife." I have to reduce her to property. That really pisses me off. I don't own her. I don't fucking want the title or the claim. I don't want to express possession, simply to refer to her (without writing a discursive dissertation). I don't like one bit that the short hand for "association" in English is expressed in the possessive. I don't own my wife or my children. They're not mine.

So, fuck you Latin and Germanic branches of the Indo-European language group.

That is all.