Mickey Z
Cool Observer
Thursday, April 19, 2007
Our dead vs. their dead
Endgame is in two volumes, right? Do people mean they’ve read both when they say they’ve read it? When I first heard it talked about I intended to pick it up and read it, and then I saw just how much time I’d be committing to. I’ll get to it eventually but not for a while. I came across an article of his that was excerpted from Endgame, on hope (or more specifically, beyond hope), which I found interesting even though I didn’t agree with it 100%. http://tinyurl.com/2tzole
I think one of the biggest reasons that the non-american deaths are not detailed and profiled, besides the obvious of it being an impossibly large task, is that it would make too real what people don’t want to believe. It is like the people in the states who didn’t believe maria teresa tula when she talked about her own torture, rape, the murders of her friends and family. People seriously told her she was wrong, because they had this idea of what el salvador was like, and her testimony didn’t fit with what they wanted to believe.
I saw some vets protesting in queens last saturday. One of the signs they were holding had the number of american soldiers killed, and it was jarring. 3,000 or whatever it is now is a big number, but it is a drop in the bucket compared to the Iraqis killed, and it seemed odd-but-normal that they didn’t use that number as well. It is the elephant in the room that no one wants to talk about. Then again, I could have made a sign and gone to stand next to them, and didn’t. I went to a bookfair instead.
Maybe the real problem is that we rely on the media to inform people, which is a rather faulty expectation to begin with. Mickey, have you read “realizing the impossible: art against authority”?
Jeremy, regarding your comment yesterday, I agree.
Posted by Deb on from NoVa 04/19 at 06:26 AMI’m not in any way denying that US’ past and ongoing culpability in the disaster that is Iraq, please don’t misunderstand. Still, shouldn’t at least a small part of the blame go to the people who are destroying each other over ethnic, religious, and other differences? The situation is a little more complex than invader vs. resistance. This is a multi-dimensional debacle.
As for endgame, it goes pretty quick, not like a 900 page calculus textbook. He has an anecdotal style that keeps thing moving along, even though the book can be very repetitive at times.
Posted by DPI on from The NJ 04/19 at 09:21 AMMorning Mickey, thats exactly what I think too. Thanks for putting it out there.
Hi Deb, thanks for the link. I havent read Jensen yet. I really like what he says about giving up hope and just doing what we can right now.Posted by frances on from bc, canada 04/19 at 09:22 AMpessimistic maybe but artful too.
Unimpeachable:
http://tinyurl.com/2ywk4hPosted by frances on from bc, canada 04/19 at 09:34 AMJust because I believe that we’ve fucked ourselves beyond possible recovery doesn’t mean I have given up.
I still wake up every day and get out of bed. I write poetry about humanity and the beauty and ugliness I see in it. I spend time with my family and friends and show them that I love them. I write a blog that has had some 25,000 hits over the years and try to get some information into those few heads I can. Yes, I am preaching to the fence sitters...but these are not some untapped 100s of millions here in the United States and some billions around the world. These are a few thousand. Those that have made their journey intelligently already...perhaps one, perhaps two that come to my blog and happen to see something that changes one small aspect of their mind. Mickey has a much wider net (though not as wide as it should be)...I know I for one developed and changed some of my most important views on the world while participating here. I know there are a few others...maybe 10, maybe 50, I don’t know. That is it.
There will be no mass conversion...here or anywhere.
But even then I have not given up hope. To guide, develop, give a chance to develop, perhaps even change ONE mind is a miracle. And as we saw reading Vol. 2 of Endgame, small groups can accomplish a lot.
Posted by JOS on from Chicago 04/19 at 10:28 AMDPI, there had never been a suicide bomber in the history of Iraq before the day that the US illegally invaded Iraq.
Saddam was pretty much brought into and kept in power through US support allowing him to keep a Sunni minority in power and his brutal dictatorship in place building the most recent chapter of the Sunni/Shiite fued to it’s current boiling point in Iraq.
The US helped Saddam and Iraqi Sunnis bomb Iran (Shiite) in the 80’s...Iran now helps the Iraqi shiite resistance.
Everything going on today can be tied to the United States...unless you want to go back to Churchill’s idiotic mapping of three separate people into one country way back when.
#### yeah, it’s complicated.
Posted by JOS on from Chicago 04/19 at 10:41 AM#3 that should read as:
I like what Jensen has to say about giving up hoping that someone else will fix the problems, giving up hoping on divine intervention, or hoping that things will change on their own. In that I become empowered to do what I can toward change. Thats what I understand Jensen to be saying.Posted by frances on from bc 04/19 at 10:45 AMOne more thing…
The illegal presence of the US military in Iraq is the fuel that will keep this civil war going for eternity. The US troops must leave immediately so that the Iraqi people can find away to acheive peace in Iraq. The day the US military leaves Iraq will be the first day that moves towards that goal.
Posted by JOS on from Chicago 04/19 at 10:46 AMDeb, it took me a week to read Endgame, vol. one. (When I first read his A Language Older Than Words I was so engrossed I stayed home and finished it in one marathon sitting.)
Jeremy (from yesterday), maybe the reason you have noticed all the pessimism is because there’s nothing to be optimistic about. I wish people would stop pretending like there is “light at the end of the tunnel” or whatever. There’s not. Even Chomsky does it when he reminds his readers how early the resistance was to the “war in Iraq” [sic, sic, sic]. All of the babies born with horrific DU-induced deformations would like to thank us influential war resisters for the years of dedicated work. Good thing we didn’t sit on the fence---we went the extra mile for those kids!
There’s no light. Get over it. Find a reason to be alive, protect what you care to protect, preserve what you can. But in the long run, it don’t make a dime’s worth of difference. Okay?
Posted by Keir on from the hague 04/19 at 11:03 AMIf Jensen’s too much to read, there’s always William Blum. “Complicated” in Iraq, as he describes it… http://www.counterpunch.org/blum06222006.html
Tell it like it is, Bill.
Posted by James on from work 04/19 at 11:07 AMHello Expendables. The sun is making a cameo appearance here in Astoria.
Thanks, as always, for the excellent conversations. DPI, I think JOS did a fine job of replying to your comment.
As for the pessimism deal, I like what both JOS and Keir said and I do plan to write a longer reply (soon) to address this charge and the questions as to “why bother writing?” and all that. Perhaps it will part of a front page post to spur further discussion.
Posted by Mickey Z. on from Astoria 04/19 at 11:26 AMI had some time to bang out a response so, let me initially state: I have an awful lot going on in my life (not just my mom’s illness) and most of it is negative. Therefore, it’s likely that some of this negativity will taint my world view and result in more gloom and doom than usual.
That said, I’d like to address a few comments. Jason and Jeremy questioned why I would bother writing if I didn’t think I could convert the fence sitters (if they exist). Firstly, I was a writer long before I became radicalized. I’m a writer...not a pundit, a politician, an academic, a scholar, a prophet, a preacher, or an evangelist. I write because I enjoy writing and have for 30 years. If I can make someone think, all the better. But even if I never influenced a single soul, I’d still write. It’s what I do. Also, who has the right to tell anyone why they should or shouldn’t write (or paint or sing or sculpt or whatever)?
As for preaching to the choir...well, I’m a nobody. I can’t get my stuff published or posted anywhere mainstream so, by definition, the vast majority of folks reading my stuff are members of the choir. However, as I stated the other day, that might be my ideal audience. Those entrenched in the mainstream—when exposed to someone like me—are typically enraged and have no interest in discussion or debate. However, a Counterpunch or ZNet reader might see my perspective as being a little more hardcore and/or “big picture” than most others and this could be a productive scenario for all involved.
Finally, there’s the issue of “pessimism.” This is an objective term and often, what I deem to be realism is seen by others as pessimism, cynicism, or even nihilism. Ultimately, the discussions here range from dark to silly and I think there’s room for many perspectives and attitudes. I hope the perceived pessimism doesn’t result in some regulars opting out.
Posted by Mickey Z. on from Astoria 04/19 at 02:03 PMA group of frogs were traveling through the woods, and two of them fell into a deep pit. All the other frogs gathered around the pit. When they saw how deep the pit was, they told the unfortunate frogs they would never get out. The two frogs ignored the comments and tried to jump up out of the pit.
The other frogs kept telling them to stop, that they were as good as dead. Finally, one of the frogs took heed to what the other frogs were saying and simply gave up. He fell down and died.
The other frog continued to jump as hard as he could. Once again, the crowd of frogs yelled at him to stop the pain and suffering and just die. He jumped even harder and finally made it out. When he got out, the other frogs asked him, “Why did you continue jumping. Didn’t you hear us?”
The frog explained to them that he was deaf. He thought they were encouraging him the entire time.
This story holds two lessons:
1. There is power of life and death in the tongue. An encouraging word to someone who is down can lift them up and help them make it through the day.
2. A destructive word to someone who is down can be what it takes to kill them. Be careful of what you say. Speak life to those who cross your path.
The power of words… it is sometimes hard to understand that an encouraging word can go such a long way. Anyone can speak words that tend to rob another of the spirit to continue in difficult times.
Special is the individual who will take the time to encourage another.
[author unknown]Posted by frances on from bc 04/19 at 02:11 PMKeir: The DU/radiation/nuclear poisoning is more a result of suppressed scientific research than unsuccessful war protesting.
Posted by frances on from bc, canada 04/19 at 02:39 PMAnd here I thought that anarchism was an inherently optimistic and idealistic philosophy! I mean, what’s more optimistic and idealistic than believing that humans could ever figure out a way to coexist without some form of government?
While I agree with the overall sentiment of Mickey’s post—that mainstream Americans are excellent at mourning the deaths of their own, but tone-deaf when it comes to empathizing with the deaths of those killed by American hands—I feel that Jensen’s Endgame (from the portions that I’ve read of it, and also what I’ve read about it) makes the similar mistake of demonizing the other, by imagining the world as a struggle between Good people and Evil people, with the existence of the Good people resting on the fact that they must destroy the Bad people.
For I could just as easily add to Mickey’s list of Imagine(s):
Imagine if Jensen got his wish, and, in connection with his wish to save the Earth by destroying Civilization by any means necessary, the world erupted into a violent battle between green anarchists versus earth-destroying capitalists;
Imagine that the green anarchists were extremely successful, and thousands of capitalists (and their fish-killing dams) were being blown up daily by the well-intentioned, Earth-saving bombs of insurrectionists;
Imagine how our discourse and actions would be different if people daily detailed for us the lives—the individuality, the small and large joys and fears and sorrows—of those capitalists that the anarchists have killed;
Imagine if we gave these victims that honor, that attention. Imagine if everyday newspapers carried an account of each capitalist who starves to death because anarchists take the resources on which the capitalists traditional community has forever depended . . . Imagine, too, if our discourse included accounts of those capitalists whose lives the anarchists would make unspeakably miserable. Imagine, finally, if we considered their capitalist lives as valuable as our own, and their contribution to the world and to our neighborhoods to be as valuable as that of an anarchist—or even more so.
Imagine . . .
Admittedly, this language has a strange ring to it, considering the amount of damage that has been done to the Earth in the name of capitalism, but wouldn’t capitalists make the same argument—that the lives of terrorists don’t deserve empathy or recognition because of the innocent deaths they have caused?
At the risk of completely losing everyone here, it reminds me of one of my favorite recurring themes from the current Battlestar Gallactica series. That is, if we must do such horribly inhumane things to preserve the existence of humanity (as is repeatedly the case in BSG, and is alluded to, if not explicitly recommended, by Jensen’s Endgame), then is humanity even worth saving?
Posted by jason on from greenpoint, brooklyn 04/19 at 03:13 PMHey Jason...I think you need to re-read Endgame fully...I think you will find that many of your above points/opinions about his writing are completely false. No one is talking about blowing up thousands of capitalists.
As for this:
“And here I thought that anarchism was an inherently optimistic and idealistic philosophy! I mean, what’s more optimistic and idealistic than believing that humans could ever figure out a way to coexist without some form of government?”
There is nothing idealistic or optimistic about the idea of humans figuring out a way to exist without government, my friend.
They did already for hundreds of thousands of years. The existence of government is but a blip in the long history of human kind.
Posted by JOS on from Chicago 04/19 at 03:25 PMAgain, I defer to JOS.
Posted by Mickey Z. on from Astoria 04/19 at 03:31 PMWow, CO still is fun whether it’s depressing or pessimistic or anachonistic or whatever… maybe the question is-- Where are the Children of the Revolution?
http://youtube.com/watch?v=8xJ_agcMy5c
Key comment there being: Elton John went from doing this to writing crappy soundtracks for Disney cartoons? Sad.
Yeah, sad…
Posted by James on from work 04/19 at 03:32 PMDear #2 DPI...I’ll tell you what the problem is...the invaders and the remainding world governments who are giving passive permission to the invaders. Diluting, downplaying the responsibility, the blame by saying Iraq, Afghanistan, Palestine has internal problems...we have internal problems that have not been address for the 500 years we have stood for the complete disregard for all life...very little has been said about the war against americans by americans...the have’s v.s. the have nots...and why this class division is an inherent part of this corrupt, backwards society/economic system
Posted by Joe of Maine on from 04/19 at 03:32 PMJOS: "re-read Endgame fully...I think you will find that many of your above points/opinions about his writing are completely false. No one is talking about blowing up thousands of capitalists."
Well, it would be helpful if you would detail where I’m wrong; stating it does not make it so. As far as No one is talking about blowing up thousands of capitalists, Jensen writes:
“I’m calling for people to bring down civilization. This will not be bloodless… They must be stopped. Through any means necessary.”
It’s not too difficult to connect the dots here. Jensen even admits that his original impetus for writing Endgame was to debunk pacifism (which he sees as aiding the destruction of the planet, because it gives the capitalists what they want). Further, he repeatedly writes that the most logical defense for a potential rape victim would be to shoot and kill their would-be rapist. He’s clearly using this as a metaphor for the capitalist-as-rapist vs. the earth-as-rape-victim.
I assume he decided to hold back on calling for specific forms of mass violence because he doesn’t want to either (a) hurt his publishing career, or (b) put a big(ger) target on his back.
They did already for hundreds of thousands of years. The existence of government is but a blip in the long history of human kind.Please. The near entirety of recorded human history is the history of patriarchy and hierarchy, with very few (though encouraging) exceptions.
Anarchism is optimistic and idealistic because it assumes, contrary to the evidence of centuries of violent oppression, that human behavior is such that humans could someday function within a classless, non-hierarchical society.
Posted by jason on from greenpoint, brooklyn 04/19 at 04:04 PMwell i have just discovered that if you want to save the world then world war three is the answer…
Posted by michael on from scotland 04/19 at 04:09 PMAll right, Jason...you fail to connect the dots as Derrick Jensen does so beautifully in Endgame because you read bits and pieces and then come to incorrect conclusions. The threat of civilization is violent and violence must sometimes be met with violence. He goes into a deep discussion of the actual definition of violence in the book, but you haven’t read it. He is by no means recommending mass slaughter...that is nothing but your false conclusion. If you don;t want to read Vol. I, read volume II, he goes into some detail there on how to fight.
“The near entirety of recorded human history ...”
RECORDED human history is only 10,000 years old at most. You obviously haven’t read much about tribal/indigenous life either, at least not from sources that weren’t tainted by the highly civilized mins...it had very little to do hierarchy and very much to do with everyone doing their part for the survival of the group. In other words, each person was of equal importance.
Posted by JOS on from Chicago 04/19 at 04:25 PMJason at #15 makes one very good point. A non-violent way of co-existing on this planet will only come with a new way of THINKING: a new way of relating with each other and with the earth. Our whole thinking is corrupted, as is our language.
It doesnt matter how you choose to organize as a group or what you choose to label yourselves, if the thinking and structure is based on the ‘old’ there will be nothing ‘new’ about it.
JOS also makes a very significant point: there have been highly successful groups of humans who have managed to live peacefully for many thousands of years. I believe however that our thinking and knowledge about these ancestors is flawed as is the bulk of archeological/anthropological study.
What an excellent conversation, and what do you know....no name calling either.
captcha says inside....as in start from the inside and work your way out?Posted by frances on from bc, canada 04/19 at 05:07 PMright on, frances. no name calling here from me (or Jason). though I have felt a bit rude...but I get fired up on these topics and sometimes get a little...snappy?
Posted by JOS on from Chicago 04/19 at 05:32 PMI’m enjoying the healthy, contentious debate. I know JOS a long time so I know he’s cool with it. How about you, Jason?
Posted by Mickey Z. on from Astoria 04/19 at 05:35 PMDid someone say ‘snappy’?
http://tinyurl.com/yexn6sReally, its a very catchy tune!
Posted by Frances on from bc 04/19 at 05:53 PMJason seems pretty level headed to me…
anyway, I have enjoyed the debate today, but I will now be away frm a computer at least until late tonight. I look forward to more comments later…
Posted by JOS on from Chicago 04/19 at 06:38 PMI’m enjoying the healthy, contentious debate… How about you, Jason?
Who me? That’s what I live for ... and I have a really boring day job.
JOS: I’ll only say a little more and then try to move on. I probably won’t read Jensen’s entire book because, well, I’ve got too much damn reading to do already, and from what I’ve already read from the book (the excerpts on his site, Amazon, and reviews elsewhere), I can’t seem to get through more than a paragraph or two without encountering some kind of straw man argument or rhetorical twisting (or downright intellectual contradiction).
In fact, I found his arguments against pacifism to be almost entirely of the straw man variety, so much so that, as someone who aspires to nonviolence, I couldn’t even identify with the arguments he was opposing. In some instances, he seems to have taken pacifist cliches and then twisted them ever so slightly to make them easier to attack. He fills the rest with ad hominem attacks (I mean, seriously, you can’t debunk someone’s political theory by claiming that aspects of their life were in contradiction to their theory; if that were the case, Jensen would fail more miserably than anyone).
Mostly I object to his notion of responding to Hate with more Hate (which if you didn’t catch it, Jensen clearly advocates, among other things). And I don’t see how people can heed his call to destroy the property apparatus of civilization without destroying the capitalists who will surely protect it with their lives. Thus, my dots connected, the “blowing up thousands (if not millions) of capitalists.”
What’s more, I don’t see what’s going to stop people from creating another earth-exploiting civilization once this one’s destroyed, unless either (a) the earth-exploiting capitalists are won over to our way of thinking, or (b) the earth-exploiting capitalists are completely wiped-out (in which case any post-revolution emergence of new forms of industrialization will have to be met with more violence). I think this is why Emma Goldman wrote that either “we must become Bolsheviks, accept terror and all it implies, or become Tolstoyans. There is no other way.” Of course, she didn’t exactly follow through with her own logic.But maybe I should give Jensen the benefit of the doubt. After all, even Howard Zinn wrote a blurb recommending Endgame.
Oops, turned into a lot more, sorry. Thanks for providing the forum, MZ.
Posted by jason on from greenpoint, brooklyn 04/19 at 07:02 PMFrances (#14): the DU/radiation/nuclear poisoning is a result of people willingly manufacturing it and other people willingly following orders to use it.
Period.
Posted by Keir on from the hague 04/19 at 07:20 PMFYI: DU-related post tomorrow.
Posted by Mickey Z. on from Astoria 04/19 at 07:53 PMOh, joy!
Posted by Keir on from the hague 04/19 at 08:30 PMDon’t forget your HAZMAT suits.
Posted by Mickey Z. on from Astoria 04/19 at 08:32 PMFrances said, “Jason at #15 makes one very good point. A non-violent way of co-existing on this planet will only come with a new way of THINKING: a new way of relating with each other and with the earth. Our whole thinking is corrupted, as is our language. It doesnt matter how you choose to organize as a group or what you choose to label yourselves, if the thinking and structure is based on the ‘old’ there will be nothing ‘new’ about it.” Frances, forgive me if I sound cynical, but good luck with this. We’re not exactly accepting when it comes to new ways of thinking and everything else you said there –wish we were though. We’ve got the “old dog” mentality as in “you can’t teach an old dog new tricks” when it comes to relearning basic communication.
Posted by dw on from Cincinnati, OH 04/19 at 08:48 PMThis is awesome-- even the mass media is reporting how hopeless it is!
http://www.kgan.com/template/inews_wire/wires.national/33270cb1-www.kgan.com.shtmlPosted by James on from Hell's Kitchen 04/19 at 09:13 PMKeir: Yes I agree. For those who know the dangers of working with uranium there is heavy responsibilty.
There are two sets of ‘science’ when it comes to radioactive isotopes. One set is straight science (debunked and overlooked), and the other is ‘special science’: scientific fact bent to fit the military and industrial agendas of a few. The scientists, in my uneducated opinion, are the real criminals. Doctors who speak out about the effects of DU are ostrisized from the scientific community and have had their lives threatened. They continue their medical research but are working parallel and not with ‘accepted’ science.
I know for a fact the soldiers who use it are not told of the dangers(nor are their families) and that controls normally in place for working with radioactive isotopes in civilian areas are stripped from the military hand book as soon as they are in the battle zone. Absolutly criminal.
As long as civilians keep investing in nuclear power and the myth that it is ‘clean and safe’ we will continue to poison Earth and have massive stockpiles of DU and other isotopes.
War is an addiction and will use whatever is at its disposal to achieve its objective. We need to go to the source of the nuclear industry and stop it there.dw: it makes you wonder what kind of change will be necessary ....Immanuel Velikovsky comes to mind.
Posted by frances on from bc 04/19 at 09:34 PMJames, McCain acts as a counter balance and sings
bomb bomb bomb bomb bomb Iran to the tune of the freaking Beach Boys!Posted by Frances on from bc 04/19 at 09:38 PMThere is definately a tendancy, as Deb
observed, even among those against the war,
to ignore the Iraqi death toll. Among war
supporters, obviously, that goes without
saying. When confronted with numbers, they
attempt to downplay them.
I’ve been in numerous debates over the
validity of the report published in the
Lancet putting the figure at well over half
a million excess deaths as a result of the
war.
The media consistently reports a figure near
that of Iraq Body Count. If they bothered to
read the IBC methodology, they would
recognize this as an extremely conservative
figure. But the media never comments on that
or mentions the fact that their number only
includes deaths reported and corroborated by
multiple mainstream media sources. Of
course, most deaths are nameless and
faceless and unreported. The media, when
citing such a low figure, never fail to fail
to explain this fact.
Keir, re: #9. I couldn’t disagree with you more. Frankly, I think yours is a horrible attitude, and the first step towards making a difference is giving up on the fatalistic attitude. Adopting an attitude like that is the best way of ensuring that one’s self-proclaimed prophecy of hopelessness remains true.
MZ, #12. I think you misunderstood our question. I don’t think either Jason or I were trying to tell you why you should or should’t write. We merely assumed that you write your political commentary in order to try to make a difference. I’m shocked to hear that this is not the case, and greatly saddened. I had thought you were a person who was truly concerned with the plight of others in this world and was writing in order to try to affect social change. I can’t express my disappointment in seeing you deny that this is so.And the pessismism isn’t “percieved”. Look at Keir’s #9. I know pessimism is a matter of objectivity, but it’s hard to mistake attitudes such as that, which have become, sadly, all too common here. If that’s not pessimism, then the word has no meaning.
Jason, JOS, re: 15 & 16. I agree with Jason. Many people here espouse this ideal regarding their favored form of government and I’ve noticed are quite active about propagating their ideas. I see two possibilities. Either people are engaging in mental masturbation or they are succombing to idealism with high optimisim. I would hope it is the latter, despite the protests that its no such thing.JOS’s comment about mankind living in peaceful coexistence is a strange one. I’m not sure which period of history could be referred to there. JOS mentions “tribal/indigenous life” in #22. I would agree we could learn much from certain tribal societies, but to say that they lived in peaceful coexistence as some sort of utopia is simply false. Such a world has yet to be achieved. It’s a possible world, but with the attitudes I see here, it will be difficult to achieve.
You want to change the world? Start by changing your attitudes.
I’m glad to see frances amd JOS agree with Jason’s #15, that a new way of thinking is required. I think the conversation here presents a perfect example of a way of thinking that needs to go out with yesterday’s garbabe.
Whew. I’ve got a lot to say today. I would also like to note that it was implied that to be optimistic is to be unrealistic. In closing, I would simply like to observe that this is a false dichotomy. One may be realistic and optimistic at the same time. Conversely, I don’t see that to be realistic means we must accept the way things are and surrender to the notion that there’s nothing we can do to affect change.
If history has taught us anything, it’s that people, individuals and groups, can do a great deal to fight the beast, to affect change, and to make real steps towards making people’s lives better, towards creating a better world.
Posted by Jeremy on from Taipei, Taiwan 04/19 at 10:21 PMThe difference between ‘our’ dead and ‘their’ dead is the color—the religion bit is the excuse!
Quote of the day:
“You twist and distort the Bible text to establish the Trinity.”
A reply by the satirical poet Solomon iben Reuben Bonfed to apostate Jew Astruc Remoch, an Orthodox Jewish medical doctor in Fraga, Spain, who renounced Judaism, embraced Catholicism, took the Spanish Catholic name Francisco Dias-Carni (Francis God-flesh) in 1391 and attempted to convert other Jews in the 14th century during the Inquisition.
Posted by phil-o-sofa on from the beautiful blue but toxic Earth 04/19 at 10:37 PMOne thought before I go to bed…
Jeremy, when did write the words peaceful coexistence anywhere?
It pains me horribly when someone puts words to my name that I never wrote down.
I will gladly explain the type of tribal/indigenous life I have researched at some point between now and the weekend.
Posted by JOS on from Oak Park 04/19 at 11:29 PMThanks for putting my thoughts into words, Mickey - you’ve done it again! And another great quote by Kurt Vonnegut.
Kindest regards to all my fellow expendables - must dash off now as Mr Helga is about to arrive in Daylesford, but will be back tomorrow.
Take care!
Posted by Helga Fremlin on from Daylesford, Australia 04/20 at 12:21 AM
Next entry: Dream Vacation: Sea, sand, and depleted uranium at Vieques
Previous entry: My movement is bigger than yours
Copyright © 2005-2007 Mickey Z.
