One thing that can be said about working at an airport is that it highly educational. The mere amount of travelers from all corners of the globe, different cultures and languages gives you a better perspective of human behavior according to such backgrounds.
I overheard a small conversation between a mother and her little boy this morning. I didn’t hear the little boy’s question, but I did hear his mother’s answer which struck me for the first time in many-many years. She said; “because he doesn’t understand English, he has his own language and this is his country and you must understand and respect that.” Such simple truth, honest and by teaching her son to be respectful of another human being for the simple reason of language, culture and being in his/hers country as foreigners. I’m sad to say this seldom happens among most foreigners traveling through or living in other countries.
Now, going back to the video you’re about to watch I’m not sure how many of you have had a chance to see it, but it did struck me once more as truthful. Though a television show, the message is clear and it does not only apply to the subject matter of America being the greatest country in the world, but all countries. If you’ve had a chance to travel anywhere, I’m sure you noticed that such attitude as the one portrayed by the young woman asking the question and the subsequent answer of both politicians is prevalent everywhere. Just look at the Nordic countries (Norway, Denmark, and Sweden) and their attitude towards the rest of Europe, especially less developed ones. The message sent out by them is that of; We don’t want foreigners living here and lowering our standards of living by leaching on to our free social services. Go to Italy, Greece, Slovenia, Croatia, France and England and the prevailing sentiment is echoed in each of the aforementioned countries. Go visit the Balkans and watch how centuries old megalomaniac sectarian ideas of Greater Serbia, Greater Albania, Greater Greece, Greater Bulgaria, Croatia, Romania and Greater Macedonia(FYROM) continue to split and segregate these countries to the brink of another “cold war”. The rhetoric is the same everywhere; We Are the greatest country there is. Just like America, each European country clings to a feverish idea based on the past and not the present. Indeed many European countries where at one time or other superpowers during human history, yet the reality of the 21st century is much-much different and they seem to be constitutionally adverse to admit their shortcomings. Portugal was once a great maritime superpower, so was Spain, England was an empire, Italy as well, Greece gave us civilization and democracy for better or for worse, France contributed to revolution and the demise autocracy for the sake of democracy and equal human rights just to see itself a few years later with yet another emperor. The list goes on and on and I would like to apologize to all the countries I failed to mention, though they must be. Continue reading
This essay is in response to “Goethe’s Prometheus & the Heretical Legacy of the Enlightenment” written by The Antinietzsche as reblogged below, or the original here. It is by no means a critical essay on Goethe’s take by AntiNietzsche, but it is my own take of the verses used in the original essay. I would like to thank The AntiNietzsche as always for exposing me to ideas I had never heard before, thus allowing me to expand my horizons and bring my own take on such ideas and issues.
Let me start by saying that reading Prometheus it seems to me Goethe himself is such a mythical character, thus his monologue is in itself his cry for shying away from conventional beliefs in God, Gods and Goddesses. This is prominently expressed in this line;
“Now you must leave alone
My Earth for Me,”
It is understandable considering the period in history Goethe writes such lines; he would feel a sense of outrage and downright revolt against the ever present and crushing force of the conventional belief in Deities. He seems to elevate human kind (or at least parts of it) to the level of God for the sake of making humanity “god-like” as the sole force of his own destiny, by refuting the idea of divine intervention which at this point has proven to be a complete failure in addressing humanity’s cry for social justice on any level. Prometheus, thus humanity/Goethe must take a stand in declaring and accepting the fact humanity is its own creator of reality as it stands at such a time. What it is to be admired at this time about Goethe is the innate realization that not just one God is “guilty” of mankind’s tumbling social structure as seen by the imminent fall of autocracy (symbolized by monarchy) and raise of the masses to achieve equality and universal rights at a better life.
“I know of nothing poorer
Under the sun, than you, you Gods!”
This sentence seems to enrich the ideas/ideals mentioned above to which Goethe seems to subscribe at this point. By expressing both a sense of dubious pity and outright defiance as well as cynical admittance to the impotence of such deities. He understands that an enlightened mind does not need to look up into the heavens in order to achieve a better life, but must look within himself in order to bring forth change, were it not for the deluded, uneducated and poor masses, who still cling to the old ideas that god/s is the sole giver and taker were it not for offering and prayers in time of needs for survival, as expressed in the last sentences;
“By sacrificial offerings
And prayerful exhalations,
And should starve
Were children and beggars not
Fools full of Hope.”
“Should I honour you? Why?” Continue reading
We are all children of Darkness born into Light. – Changeling
Native American Two-Spirits
“If your whole life is connected spiritually, then you learn that self-pride – the image of self- is connected with everything else. That becomes part of who you are and you carry that wherever you are.”
Spotted Eagle (Two-Spirit of the White Mountain Apache, quoted in Feinberg)
At least 135 Northern American tribes have been documented as integrating alternative gender roles. A complex sex/gender system was found “in every region of the continent, among every type of Native culture, from the small bands of hunters in Alaska to the populous, hierarchical city-states in Florida.”. Transgender lifestyles were honored and often coincided with healing and shamanic practices.
Here are some Native American names for Two-Spirits or transgender people:
Berdache: [“Berdache” was a derogatory term European colonizers used to label any Native person who did not fit their narrow notions of woman and man…]
Badé / Boté (by Crow people)
Warhameh (by Cocopa people)
Joya (by Chumash people)
Kwiraxame (by Maricopa people)
Ihamana (by Zuni people)
Winkte (by Lakota people)
Nadleeh (by Navajo people)
Excerpt taken from Labyrinthos Potnia
I would like to thank The AntiNietzsche for writing such an interesting article which allowed me to explore something new and never encountered before. – Lucianus
It is apparent to me that while Nietzsche is trying to chastise Socrates and his contemporaries, as well as his own contemporary philosophers, he is falling into the same ideological mistake he is trying to fight in the first place.
Without myth every culture loses the healthy natural power of its creativity: only a horizon defined by myths completes and unifies a whole cultural movement. Myth alone saves all the powers of the imagination and of the Apollonian dream from their aimless wanderings.– At the same time considering Nietzsche’s background as far as religion is concerned, it’s seems very odd he would push forth the idea of myth as means to create a sound foundation, while forgetting that once a myth is created it is almost certain it will become reality and agreed upon as truth and used as a model for the rest of the plebeian horde. Also Nietzsche seems to be under the false belief that myth does not constitute a danger to humanity as long as it’s under careful check in reminding others that it is simply just so, a myth and nothing more. This flaw in judgment and e determination on his part to simplify this point (the myth creation) seems rather infantile almost to the brink of naiveté, something no serious philosopher should ever fall prey of.
“In this regard, Nietzsche isn’t so much anti-irrationality, as he is anti-dependency. In his eyes, despite his staunch godlessness, even the creation of myths to serve as the foundation upon which to build a greater human consciousness would not be unacceptable (albeit as long as the individuals who create the myth do not allow themselves to forget that their myths are fictitious frameworks, and therefore do not become servants to the beings they create)” I understand his need to fight dependency, but the replacement he suggests is in itself a dangerous one, for human history has shown time and time again what myth can become and hence change the very core of those who created it, thus changing the common man (plebes). He seems to be arrogantly blinded by an ideal of what the human race needs in order for it to thrive. He’s almost delusional to the point of climax in the way he describes such belief in myth. There’s almost something erotic coming from his statements on myth and the Apollonian dream. Is it possible our philosopher is trying debunk someone else’s work and at the same time tryin to satisfy e personal urge for return back to romanticism, even though such an ideal has long been dead and buried? Continue reading
I’m so glad you wrote about Mary Shelley and her book; because I have never read it nor have I ever seen the movies made from it, except of course Young Frankenstein, which is hilarious.
Since I was humble enough from the start to admit my ignorance on both the book and its author I’m going to focus my comment on your excerpts and commentary and from on a personal point of view (as always) and more in regards to the French Revolution.
Our innate attribute to seek, find and explore the unknown, whether it be in our personal lives, in the world surrounding us, or the unknown out there in the universe as well as quantum physics, we are driven not by what we know and have learned thus far, but by what we don’t know and the mysteries which surround any of said subject matters. In the case of Frankenstein and you equating of this novel to the French Revolution, you make a bold move towards intertwining fiction with reality, which in this case I’m happy to say was very correct. In “Limits To My Empathy” you write and I quote “In my honest opinion, quite a few people who care strongly about a humanitarian issue end up becoming so engrossed in the presumed righteousness of their position they let their empathy and passion cloud their objectivity and rationality (I offer the various sociopolitical movements of the 19th and 20th Century as an example of this problem).” I’m quite sure; part of this remark was in part in regards to the French Revolution. I’m sure you will agree with me when saying the French Revolution can be used as a blueprint for all other revolutions of the 19th and 20th century. As an absolute resolute counter-revolutionary, I’ve always felt it was my duty to remind people that any revolution of any form is never the answer to socio-economic injustice. I see revolution as the beast from hell which after being summoned on earth it eats off those who called upon IT in the first place before devouring the rest of humanity. Continue reading