For a minute there I thought I had to get off my couch, when all the while the fact is we don't have to do anything much but keep things afloat for just a few decades more! In fact, we'd best shut up about PO, because if our offspring finds out we knew about it all along, they'll turn and wring our necks come 2036!
The reason Kunstler and not the other Peak writers, is the subject of this thread is, I guess, that he won't keep his own political views out. And he's very pro-war. That's unusual among Peakers by the way, except for maybe a really aggressive geo-green type writer, who'd be for getting all the oil before some other country does. Doubless if the Bush admin. has acknowledged the PO problem at all, they have some geo-greens advocating the "grab it now" in preparation for the "last man standing" scenario. But none of the major writers, Heinberg, Diamond, Deffeyes, etc is pro-war, they pretty much just keep their PO writings to the subject of PO. They don't mix the job of convincing the public that PO is a real concern, with the "job" of indoctrinating them to their political views.
I agree, ILP. Kunstler, being an objective messenger of PO doom, should stay away from voicing, in the same book, what might be construed as an emotional or political opinion of what needs to be done in response.
He has done something tantamount to arming the sheep-people with knowledge, thereby releasing them from the pen, only in turn to arm them with what is possibly rabid propaganda and placing them right back into the pen - effectively transforming them into more dangerous, rabid sheep.
Whereever such a line exists, my instinct is that it shouldn't be crossed. Politicians though, as a rule, are exempt.
The reason Kunstler and not the other Peak writers, is the subject of this thread is, I guess, that he won't keep his own political views out. And he's very pro-war. That's unusual among Peakers by the way, except for maybe a really aggressive geo-green type writer, who'd be for getting all the oil before some other country does. Doubless if the Bush admin. has acknowledged the PO problem at all, they have some geo-greens advocating the "grab it now" in preparation for the "last man standing" scenario. But none of the major writers, Heinberg, Diamond, Deffeyes, etc is pro-war, they pretty much just keep their PO writings to the subject of PO. They don't mix the job of convincing the public that PO is a real concern, with the "job" of indoctrinating them to their political views.
Joined: Jun 12, 2005 Posts: 4189 Location: 1st territorial capitol of AZ
Posted: Sun Jun 26, 2005 12:30 am Post subject:
Going through his Fark Archives a bit, for year 2003, I sure remember his saying, about the time Bush started Gulf War II that he sure things Bush is doing the right thing, WMDs could be there, etc yadda yadda, looking tonight I can find Kunstler describing himself as a "war hawk" but can't find the other stuff right now, looking at his own, easily-edited blog is not the best way to find what the guy's said though, someone must have archives of his blog from the time written before any later regrets and re-writes, because, and many here can second me on this, Kunstler was sure pro-war at least when Gulf War II was started, and said Bush was doing the right thing and all the basic neocon delusions.
Going through his Fark Archives a bit, for year 2003, I sure remember his saying, about the time Bush started Gulf War II that he sure things Bush is doing the right thing, WMDs could be there, etc yadda yadda, looking tonight I can find Kunstler describing himself as a "war hawk" but can't find the other stuff right now, looking at his own, easily-edited blog is not the best way to find what the guy's said though, someone must have archives of his blog from the time written before any later regrets and re-writes, because, and many here can second me on this, Kunstler was sure pro-war at least when Gulf War II was started, and said Bush was doing the right thing and all the basic neocon delusions.
It plays well in Israel!
I concur. Kunstler was a blogging jingoist all along from before the hostilities began up to the penultimate ending, with the president looking photogenic on that aircraft carrier.
I still don't see how you've earned the right to label Kunstler a 'neocon'. So please explain what the word 'neocon' means to you, and why you think Kunstler fits that definition.
We can decide whether the neocon label is correct by a preponderance of the evidence.
Joined: Jun 12, 2005 Posts: 4189 Location: 1st territorial capitol of AZ
Posted: Sun Jun 26, 2005 2:35 am Post subject:
I love Kunstler's writings, I've bought his book, I think he's doing a great service in getting around as much as he does, which is a lot, and waking some people up about Peak Oil.
Yet, I have read him saying that the "islamo-fascists" want to kill us all, that Bush is doing the right thing in charging into the middle east, describing himself as a war hawk, and endorsing the war, at least as long as a bunch of southerners' kids have to go eh?
His distaste for the south, for the working class, and his continual carping on how the US is going to lapse into, his term, corn-pone Nazism, furthers the picture. You just can't trust those goyim!
A great many US families have ancestors or living members who fought against the Nazis in WWII. The "Greatest Generation" in my family did their bit, where does Kunstler get off assuming just because we're not "his" people we can hardly wait to start following a new Hitler around?
His pro-war stance annoys me, his in effect calling me and many fellow Americans who are not "his" people disgusts and offends me.
Joined: Jun 12, 2005 Posts: 4189 Location: 1st territorial capitol of AZ
Posted: Sun Jun 26, 2005 2:49 am Post subject:
I found it!!
Google "kunstler prowar" and go to the first link, there's an EXCELLENT essay on this, the URL is as long as my arm and the actual essay as long as several football fields, but a darned good read.
Author starts with what Kunstler wrote on april 2, 2003 and takes it from there, supplying much other materal.
Kunstler writes SO well, but mixing in politics and scorn for segments of humanity not his own erodes credibility.
Google "kunstler prowar" and go to the first link, there's an EXCELLENT essay on this, the URL is as long as my arm and the actual essay as long as several football fields, but a darned good read.
Author starts with what Kunstler wrote on april 2, 2003 and takes it from there, supplying much other materal.
Kunstler writes SO well, but mixing in politics and scorn for segments of humanity not his own erodes credibility.
ILP: Okay, I read through the essay as well as the blog commentary below it. And I have to say it's fascinating how, now a month later, we here on the PO forum are pumping out the identical arguments as the bloggers did back then - as though we were 'factioned' primates under research, successfully programmed by the news environment.
IMO, the most raw and astouding statement made be Kunstler came just a day after the attack of 9/11, as follows:
Quote:
September 12, 2001
The dark of events of Tuesday September 11 compel us to recognize that we are at war with Jihad, the multinational campaign against western civilization. We should expect the full fury of the American military to be brought to bear, serially, on several Islamic capitals, though it is very doubtful that we could ever control the actual territory of these nations, or should wish to or hope to.
Right now, in the rush of media reports, news is scant about what the American military is actually doing.
The following seems to me to be an apprpriate unfolding response to the vicious attacks on United States territory.
It would seem appropriate, first, to demand that the Taliban government of the poor and wretched nation of Afganistan produce the terrorist Osama Bin Ladin and his assistants and place them in the hands of NATO authorities within a very brisk time frame. Failure to comply ought to result in the complete destruction of Kabul and other Taliban-controlled towns.
Second, the people of Iraq should be warned to depart their capital city, Baghdad, which should then be completely destroyed.
The nation of Israel should begin immediately the deportation of Palestinians from the West Bank to the Kingdom of Jordan. The people of Gaza Strip should be transported to Egypt, and the Gaza incorporated into the state of Israel.
The government of Syria should be notified to begin evacuations of Damascus pending its destruction within a short time frame. Ditto Tripoli, capital of Lybia.
Americans must face the harsh fact that it is now necessary to put Jihad out of business.
The events of Sept 11th will only accelerate the problems Americans face vis-a-vis our inordinate use of oil, and our hyper oil-dependent living arrangements.
Prepare for war and austerity.
Admitedly, Kunstler looks pretty bad here. 'Neocon-like' in his drastic, fool-hardy, ethnic-cleansing notions? Yes, it would seem so. But neocon by its full definition? Not necessarily.
I myself would take less issue with your posts if you would stick to using more judgment-neutral terms. For example, if you were to say "Kunstler's personal views about Israel and the surrounding Arab countries are virtually indistinguishable from those of the Washington neocons - this would be a damming statement that you could indeed back up.
But, again, stating that Kunstler is, conclusively, a neocon is so much sloppy reporting - unless you can back it up!
Joined: Jun 12, 2005 Posts: 4189 Location: 1st territorial capitol of AZ
Posted: Sun Jun 26, 2005 4:22 pm Post subject:
OK I may not know what being a "neocon" is, fully, then. I know it's being a Jewish or Christian Zionist, who doesn't mind enlisting the USA's youth and resources towards that goal, to the detriment of the US.
I'll just adopt that statement of yours in quotes because that's exactly how I feel.
Joined: May 26, 2004 Posts: 309 Location: Ontario, Canada
Posted: Mon Jun 27, 2005 8:00 pm Post subject:
Can we put this man on the Peak Oil marketing board? Kunstler is priceless. He has been wrong plenty of times, and lately has been going into attack-dog mode like crazy on the newspaper circuit. So he's not who you lead with, and you take it with a grain of salt, big deal.
But god-damn if reading his literary gems isn't the best moments of my day. His writing is the wine of peakniks. _________________ "Our forces are now closer to the center of Baghdad than most American commuters are to their downtown office."
--Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, April 2003
Last edited by Whitecrab on Mon Jun 27, 2005 8:19 pm; edited 1 time in total
Joined: Jun 12, 2005 Posts: 4189 Location: 1st territorial capitol of AZ
Posted: Mon Jun 27, 2005 8:12 pm Post subject:
Yeah his writing, most of it, when he's not talking about "cleansing" Palestine, is great stuff! I love his monthly gallery of awful architecture, I still need to get his Geography of Nowhere book because I'm sure it's a real gem, even his rant against how awful things are when traveling, recently written, that got a number of noses out of joint on here, tickled me.
It's like listening to "Michael Savage" whom I also enjoy, it's like a cranky old uncle who's always got something interesting to say, but when "Savage" gets going on any of the other talk-show people who are not fellow Jews, there's just all this unbased vitriol, calling Hannity the Leprechaun, etc. You know Hannity could never-ever get away with calling him "The Rabbi", lol.
Joined: Sep 14, 2004 Posts: 6141 Location: Rural Virginia
Posted: Tue Jun 28, 2005 1:40 pm Post subject:
eastbay wrote:
"Thought Police'??... lol... you silly person, who cares what you think. I certainly don't. It's just an observation of what you WROTE.
Hmm, eastbay, isn't it possible that what one writes is a reflection of what one thinks? The Thought Police also censoriously examine what people write, you know, and that's all we really have on this site---writing. You obviously think you're De Final Judge of what's fit and proper to write here. You should apply for a position in Bush's so-called Justice Dept.---I'm sure they have a place waiting for you.
So yesterday Howard Dean, recently retired governor of Vermont who is in a long-shot bid to become president, told an audience of Democratic women that the Democratic party was doomed to lose the next election if they didn't start acting like a responsible opposition with some ideas of their own. I like that call to arms -- since I am officially a registered Democrat -- and I like Dean -- he was a first-rate governor who actually accomplished some things in his cute little state, such as getting all indigent children on a state medical insurance plan. (Dean also happens to be a medical doctor).
It also happens that Dean is pretty vehemently anti-war (that is, anti Iraq War). As readers have probably gathered, I'm not anti-war. I'm persuaded it was necessary to kick Saddam Hussein's ass to remind the Jihadistas of the world, who despise weakness, that the US has not become a cringing, craven, soft-headed culture who will absorb any outrage without striking back. What I am far less sure about is America's ability to exercise hegemony and protect oil drilling equipment over such a vast and faraway territory full of hostile people. But time will tell about that.
...The Democrats can also begin a national discussion about the huge project of downscaling and re-scaling many of the normal activities of our national life. The North American natural gas situation... <etc. etc. Kunstler rant>
Why haven't the Democratic party leaders already discovered these issues? Why are they running on ideological fumes like affirmative action and "diversity" (whatever the Fark that means)? I wish I knew. At this point I can only ascribe it to consensus trance. They've been sleepwalking into the future just like everybody else.
So, Howard Dean, the ball is in your court. . . .
At other times back in his post-sept-11 days, Kunstler seems to have a balanced view of George Bush's policies. He claims he doesn't regard Bush as severely as his leftist friends for being a "big business shill," and seemed to support him on Iraq, but disagrees tremendously with his economic policy.
Kunstler seems a centrist/pragmatist most of the time, maybe a bit left-leaning since he obviously doesn't care about religion or saving big business. I think he was hawkish on the war because he believed Saddam had WMDs, and Kunstler also seems to have been more worried about the Middle East than reality has so far warranted. ("Saudi Arabia could very easily topple" "The Jihadists will be inspired" etc.) _________________ "Our forces are now closer to the center of Baghdad than most American commuters are to their downtown office."
--Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, April 2003
So yesterday Howard Dean, recently retired governor of Vermont who is in a long-shot bid to become president, told an audience of Democratic women that the Democratic party was doomed to lose the next election if they didn't start acting like a responsible opposition with some ideas of their own. I like that call to arms -- since I am officially a registered Democrat -- and I like Dean -- he was a first-rate governor who actually accomplished some things in his cute little state, such as getting all indigent children on a state medical insurance plan. (Dean also happens to be a medical doctor).
It also happens that Dean is pretty vehemently anti-war (that is, anti Iraq War). As readers have probably gathered, I'm not anti-war. I'm persuaded it was necessary to kick Saddam Hussein's ass to remind the Jihadistas of the world, who despise weakness, that the US has not become a cringing, craven, soft-headed culture who will absorb any outrage without striking back. What I am far less sure about is America's ability to exercise hegemony and protect oil drilling equipment over such a vast and faraway territory full of hostile people. But time will tell about that.
...The Democrats can also begin a national discussion about the huge project of downscaling and re-scaling many of the normal activities of our national life. The North American natural gas situation... <etc. etc. Kunstler rant>
Why haven't the Democratic party leaders already discovered these issues? Why are they running on ideological fumes like affirmative action and "diversity" (whatever the Fark that means)? I wish I knew. At this point I can only ascribe it to consensus trance. They've been sleepwalking into the future just like everybody else.
So, Howard Dean, the ball is in your court. . . .
At other times back in his post-sept-11 days, Kunstler seems to have a balanced view of George Bush's policies. He claims he doesn't regard Bush as severely as his leftist friends for being a "big business shill," and seemed to support him on Iraq, but disagrees tremendously with his economic policy.
Kunstler seems a centrist/pragmatist most of the time, maybe a bit left-leaning since he obviously doesn't care about religion or saving big business. I think he was hawkish on the war because he believed Saddam had WMDs, and Kunstler also seems to have been more worried about the Middle East than reality has so far warranted. ("Saudi Arabia could very easily topple" "The Jihadists will be inspired" etc.)
I stand corrected and apologize to those I may have bismirched with my slashing, saber wit. The guy supported Bush. That is pathetic.
I think I still like the guy though. He was probably just trying to irritate his demographic peers, the politically correct baby boomers who don't understand the "Geography of Nowhere."
He makes fun of suburbia better than anyone other than me. I hate farking suburbia. It is to paraphrase Kunstler, "The biggest misappropriation of wealth the world has every seen."
Kunstler's latest blog entry states "We had to look" for WMD in Iraq - by invading. An astounding statement to make at this time since there are now many sources documenting that both the US and Britain knew in 2002 that there were almost certainly no significant functional WMD in Iraq. _________________ "The world is changed... I feel it in the water... I feel it in the earth... I smell it in the air... Much that once was, is lost..." - Galadriel
Joined: Jun 12, 2005 Posts: 4189 Location: 1st territorial capitol of AZ
Posted: Mon Jul 04, 2005 5:51 pm Post subject:
"Also troubling is the presumption that even if we manage to pacify this large, violent, desperate place, that such pacification will send a message to other dangerous nations in the region that such a state of coercive pacification is to be envied."
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
News
Discussions
Resources
Members
Forum FAQ
Search
Usergroups
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
ree rah rip ram. sunofabitch godamn. hidey didey christ almighty. rah rah crap 
