The Story of Human Sacrifice

[Griff]

Well that's one way to interpret what he said. More charitably, I'd say that he sees scapegoating as a constant problem because individuals and societies refuse to take responsibility for their actions. Admittedly, it is a lot easier to take responsibility for actions at the level of the individual. That is why its so important to keep decision making as local as possible, something the Greens occasionally give a nod to.

When it comes to foreign policy, those societies we lack significant informal connections with seem the least likely to separate the individual American from his governments policy. The decent treatment of our Olympic athletes in Greece can be taken as evidence of this separation in the European mind. In the Arab world Americans are oilmen and soldiers so its easy to scapegoat us as a whole people. Our lack of consideration for Iraqi losses leads me to believe that our view of the Moslem world is similarly stilted, even if better informed.

[russotto]

The story of hubris (pride rivalling that of the gods, not "grandiosity", though he gives both as the definition) being the worst sin goes back to the Greeks the word comes from; it's a standard feature of many Greek (and later) myths. If it took him several years to refine the "Story" to this, he obviously was a lousy researcher; a simple textbook could have given him as much. I'm not sure why he had to bring Atlas Shrugged into it other than to slam Ayn Rand, who is in any case dead.

The article is pretty much a rant; it wanders from point to point and doesn't come close to holding together. Tony's summary is quite accurate in portraying that.

Originally Posted by russotto

The story of hubris (pride rivalling that of the gods, not "grandiosity", though he gives both as the definition) being the worst sin goes back to the Greeks the word comes from; it's a standard feature of many Greek (and later) myths. If it took him several years to refine the "Story" to this, he obviously was a lousy researcher; a simple textbook could have given him as much. I'm not sure why he had to bring Atlas Shrugged into it other than to slam Ayn Rand, who is in any case dead.

The article is pretty much a rant; it wanders from point to point and doesn't come close to holding together. Tony's summary is quite accurate in portraying that.

The article rambled and could have been more tightly written, but the truth it presents remains valid for all that. The author's thesis that a false sense of grandiosity or pride (which is cause by an underlying feeling of insecurity) leads to envy and a projection of negative feelings upon another person or group. We then blame this other for our flaws and treat them accordingly.

The writer would have been better off briefly discussing Carl Jung's concept of the "shadow" and how Jung's analogy can be used to explain the current attitudes of various nations and religous groups.

The writer has a point about Ayn Rand, but I'm not sure why he threw her into the essay either except for the fact that he obviously dislikes her. Perhaps the author was throwing HIS shadow on Ms. Rand.

At any rate, Ayn Rand, living or dead, is as fair game as anyone else. Her books, unfortunately, continue to influence thousands if not millions. I read her at 16 and thought I was a philosopher. I re-read her again at 22 and couldn't believe that I'd been so easily influenced by what was nothing other than a couple of trashy romance novels with pretentious wordings.

[Griff]

I'd say Rand was more than that Mari. I think it's important that hard working, creative, productive people be seen as heroic. Their productivity is what pays for everything else in our society. Rand was very good at portraying how statism destroys that productivity. Unfortunately, she has followers who take hers as THE voice and don't just take her lesson and move on.

[xoxoxoBruce]

True, Griff. Many years ago, my best friend read Atlas Shrugged and became a complete asshole virtually overnight. It was scary. The last I heard, he's remained so, to this day.

Originally Posted by Griff

I'd say Rand was more than that Mari. I think it's important that hard working, creative, productive people be seen as heroic. Their productivity is what pays for everything else in our society. Rand was very good at portraying how statism destroys that productivity. Unfortunately, she has followers who take hers as THE voice and don't just take her lesson and move on.

I couldn't agree with you more about honoring creative, productive people. I think sometimes its the everyday Joe who sticks with his wife and kids, goes in and does his 8 hours plus who is one of the greatest hero's around. But Rand saw the world in black and white, just as that article described. People were either heroic producers or scumbag parasites - no shades of grey in between. She was as much a casualty of the cold war mentality as anyone. Rand had a certain intelligence to her. In another life she would have made an excellent accountant and never gone anywhere near a typewriter. The world would be a better place if she had gone to business school and kept her odd political beliefs to herself.

[Lady Sidhe]

Originally Posted by Griff

Well that's one way to interpret what he said. More charitably, I'd say that he sees scapegoating as a constant problem because individuals and societies refuse to take responsibility for their actions. Admittedly, it is a lot easier to take responsibility for actions at the level of the individual.

Take responsibility? Individuals taking responsibility? Are you MAD?? It's not their (whomever "they" may be) fault, it's someone else's. You must try to UNDERSTAND them, not hold them responsible. *snort* You're such an unenlightened barbarian! (/sarcasm)


Sidhe

[DanaC]

Bah. Understanding people. What a waste of time

Originally Posted by DanaC

Bah. Understanding people. What a waste of time

I agree, its much easier to adopt an attitude of blanket hatred. This saves both time and energy. Kill of 'em all, then there will be more for me!