It is hard to nail something up , on the internet , but here it goes anyway :
(1) I believe - as a percentage - more Protestants than Catholics deny human climate change and that they do so more vehemently.
(2) I believe - as a percentage - more people of Anglo-Saxon (sic) origins deny human climate change than do people of other ethnic origins.
(3) I believe - as a percentage - more males than females strongly deny human climate change.
(4) I believe - as a percentage - more better off people than poorer people vehemently deny human climate change.
(5) I believe - as a percentage - that more native born citizens than immigrants , strongly deny human climate change.
(6) I believe - as a percentage - more people with some post secondary education deny strongly human climate change than do people with either high school or less education or those with post-graduate education.
(7) I believe - as a percentage - people who deny human climate change dislike immigration, minorities, disabled, women and gay rights, more so than do non-deniers.
(8) I believe - as a percentage - more deniers than non-deniers believe super powers should 'go it alone' rather than first helping to assemble a coalition of allies bound by a common goal.
That instead they prefer to use their nationally-exclusive super weapons against the enemy, like some WWII comic book super hero, sailing above community, democracy and the rule of law.
Which is to say, far more adult deniers than non-deniers still believe it was Captain America and not Joe and Willie that actually won WWII.
(9) I believe - that as a percentage - more whites, than non-white , deny human climate change.
(9.5) I believe - as a percentage - that more climate change deniers prefer the Fifties to the Sixties than do non-deniers.
And that the more widely read among the deniers secretly yearn for the halcyon days of pre-1939, when Anglo Saxon empires and Anglo Saxon eugenics and Anglo-Saxon scientism still ruled the world.
Which is to say that human climate change isn't really the issue for them.
It is but a 'rally around the wagons' symbol.
A last ditch battle to decide whether anyone or anything (be it a minority group, a gender or Mother Nature herself) can ever impose any limits on a traditional ruling group to do what ever it wants, where ever it wants, when ever it wants, for as much as it wants ....
Showing posts with label captain america. Show all posts
Showing posts with label captain america. Show all posts
Tuesday, January 6, 2015
Thursday, December 25, 2014
1943 : War Movie vs Film Noir , Captain America comics vs Joe & Willy comics
I would argue - I do argue - that the most Noirish 'gotcha' of all WWII was the simple one panel Bill Mauldin cartoon that won him a Pulitzer prize in 1945.
That cartoon's title is a quote from an actual news report, repeated at the top verbatim :
"Fresh, spirited American troops, flushed with victory, are bringing in thousands of hungry, ragged, battle-weary prisoners"
Just one sentence from hundreds of thousands of similarly morale-uplifting sentences published on all sides of that six long years of the war.
But below it was Mauldin's simple pencil strokes depicting weary despondent Allied troops (infantry riflemen like his famous Joe and Willy) escorting equally weary despondent Axis infantry POWs to the rear , all engulfed in a cold driving rain.
At second and third glance the cartoon is actually quite hard to read - both sets of infantrymen look so much alike in their miserable state.
Eventually you figure out that the American GIs have their distinctive steel helmets while the Axis have forage caps.
Professor and author Paul Fussell also served in the the infantry in WWII - as a very junior officer- and he knew full well what this cartoon captured.
In one of his best books, entitled Wartime , he zeroed in on petty chickenshit , as he and millions of other front line troops called it.
That constant modern need to plenticide the complexities of a global war into a simple black and white parable between the always good guys in white hats and the always bad guys in black.
As a Modernity-destroying rebuttal, this masterwork of art, this simple cartoon, was right up there with books like Catch 22 or films like Double Indemnity ...
That cartoon's title is a quote from an actual news report, repeated at the top verbatim :
"Fresh, spirited American troops, flushed with victory, are bringing in thousands of hungry, ragged, battle-weary prisoners"
Just one sentence from hundreds of thousands of similarly morale-uplifting sentences published on all sides of that six long years of the war.
But below it was Mauldin's simple pencil strokes depicting weary despondent Allied troops (infantry riflemen like his famous Joe and Willy) escorting equally weary despondent Axis infantry POWs to the rear , all engulfed in a cold driving rain.
At second and third glance the cartoon is actually quite hard to read - both sets of infantrymen look so much alike in their miserable state.
Eventually you figure out that the American GIs have their distinctive steel helmets while the Axis have forage caps.
Professor and author Paul Fussell also served in the the infantry in WWII - as a very junior officer- and he knew full well what this cartoon captured.
In one of his best books, entitled Wartime , he zeroed in on petty chickenshit , as he and millions of other front line troops called it.
That constant modern need to plenticide the complexities of a global war into a simple black and white parable between the always good guys in white hats and the always bad guys in black.
As a Modernity-destroying rebuttal, this masterwork of art, this simple cartoon, was right up there with books like Catch 22 or films like Double Indemnity ...
Tuesday, December 2, 2014
Deniers NEVER deny problems - merely deny that they can't be as easily solved as Superman jumps over buildings...
Take human-originated baneful climate change : climate deniers don't deny that it could exist, merely that if and when it emerges, it will be a quick job for Batman , Spiderman or Captain America to clear up.
Nobody who makes a living solving problems (and let's see , that includes all politicians, all business people, all experts & professionals, all generals, church leaders, on and on) ever denies that problems (their very bread and butter) don't exist.
Far from it -- they are far more likely to see problems where none exist (widespread satanic cults eating our babies anyone ?) or over-exaggerate those that do exist (just as police chiefs always seem to see a growing crime wave just before proposed budget cuts.)
The only thing that most deny is the problems can't be solved or solved relatively easily.
I use that weasel word 'relatively' because expert-problem-solvers-for-money always walk a thin line.
So their pitch to clients has always to be something like this : "your problem is worse than you thought (boo) but it is solvable (hurray) but it is going to cost you some money and time (boo) , but not a whole lot of time and money."
The key word is 'solvable' - lets leave it to the courts to resolve why too much time and too much cost and and too little success emerged from so many of such promises.
Solvable is a post birth of science term , because you still see relatively few religious leaders guaranteeing success : its all "God's ( or the gods') will be done".
So while scientists today appear to be on the side of the angels on combatting baneful climate change (with climate deniers the spawn of the devil) , we must pony up and admit the deniers are sustained intellectually by scientists - not by pre-science thought like that from the world's ancient religions .
That is why this newsletter will attack scientists far more than climate deniers, in my effort to help awake the world to possibly unstoppable climate change....
Nobody who makes a living solving problems (and let's see , that includes all politicians, all business people, all experts & professionals, all generals, church leaders, on and on) ever denies that problems (their very bread and butter) don't exist.
Far from it -- they are far more likely to see problems where none exist (widespread satanic cults eating our babies anyone ?) or over-exaggerate those that do exist (just as police chiefs always seem to see a growing crime wave just before proposed budget cuts.)
The only thing that most deny is the problems can't be solved or solved relatively easily.
I use that weasel word 'relatively' because expert-problem-solvers-for-money always walk a thin line.
So their pitch to clients has always to be something like this : "your problem is worse than you thought (boo) but it is solvable (hurray) but it is going to cost you some money and time (boo) , but not a whole lot of time and money."
The key word is 'solvable' - lets leave it to the courts to resolve why too much time and too much cost and and too little success emerged from so many of such promises.
Solvable is a post birth of science term , because you still see relatively few religious leaders guaranteeing success : its all "God's ( or the gods') will be done".
So while scientists today appear to be on the side of the angels on combatting baneful climate change (with climate deniers the spawn of the devil) , we must pony up and admit the deniers are sustained intellectually by scientists - not by pre-science thought like that from the world's ancient religions .
That is why this newsletter will attack scientists far more than climate deniers, in my effort to help awake the world to possibly unstoppable climate change....
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)