Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Archive for January 13th, 2009

A lighter topic for a change. On relationships: I read recently about the anguish of a girl from Atlanta, a not so uncommon sentiment among women these days: “There aren’t enough men to go around.” But according to this blogger, this is becoming a serious problem in Atlanta:

Last time I checked there was 21 women for everyone 1 man and the problem doesn’t stop there because the you have to factor in the homosexual males, men with kids, liars & cheaters, people with stds, no job etc.   The problem is so big that the unattractive and broke down men now think they have a choice, lol.  Granted all of the women here in Atlanta are not wife material but there are plenty of good women out here who are at their wits end.  Living here you can’t play by the same rules like not taking care of your man mentally, sexually, etc because if you don’t some other woman will.

Sadly because of the high demand for a man you’re finding many women settling for the bottom feeders who would never stand a chance anywhere else.  I mean you know it’s bad when you see women working and men sitting at home with no job, using her car, and still having the nerve to cheat.

Interestingly, girls in Atlanta don’t have to go far for “decent” advice. Jeff Herring in an ezine article offers his “analysis” of the Atlanta Singles Dating Myths:

What this does is foster the myth that good partners are scarce and hard to find. If this its true, then you beter settle for whatever you can find.

Results of this myth

In a word, desperation. You stay with somemone who is not right for you, just to be with someone. Sets up a miserable situation.

What to do

This is one of those situtations where attitude is everything. When you approoach dating from an attitude of scarcity, you see scarcity. When you approach dating from an attitude of plenty and abundance, you see plenty and abundance.

It’s all about attitude eh? (read: Law Of Attraction again?). How’s this for attitude: our favorite cynical Chinese girl Intsiksiomai offers her take on an inherent flaw in that legendary female intuition which can help explain the devastation of women in Atlanta: girls simply fall for jerks very easily:

Most girls overlook this weakness in men, until it’s too late. They have married one! Girls get easily flattered with the protectiveness and concern of jerks. Girls often allow their men to control them like robots, all under the guise of love. Girls give up their career, and even their basic human rights for the pleasure of the jerks.

It’s also with some sense of eerie coincidence that a Chinese girl would offer this insight, because if you really think men are in short supply, whether as a statistical fact or simply a whimsical notion, then you better pack your bags and get headed for China: where centuries of male-preferential breeding has actually created a real gender concentration:

WUHAN, China — Chinese traditions, a tough one-child-per-couple policy and modern medical technology have combined to create a demographic nightmare that threatens China’s stability and endangers prospects for greater political freedom in the country with the world’s largest population. Over the next two decades, as many as 40 million young Chinese men won’t be able to marry, settle down and start families. There won’t be enough wives to go around.

Advertisements

Read Full Post »

Ben Bernanke Takes Questions

Here is the current Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke seen taking questions on January 13, 2009 after he gave his speech at the London School of Economics. He is the man who is always talked about by Jim Rogers and Peter Schiff when they disagree about the Federal Reserve’s actions.

Watch the video clips and see who you prefer to believe. (You can search for several of Peter Schiff’s and Jim Rogers’ interviews on this website by placing their names on the “search box”.

 

Read Full Post »

According to the youtube write-up, this interview was on March 19, 2008. At that time Jim Rogers was fed up with the Federal Reserve, are you?

Read Full Post »

Collectivism has taken quite a lot of criticism over the years and it might be interesting to know why this is the case.

What Is Collectivism?

In a broad sense, Collectivism can refer to any ideal, social, or political thought that puts emphasis on interdependence and the group above individuality or identity. Collectivists seek to be part of a greater whole–a larger scheme that is greater than the individual parts of that whole.

Nationalism, fascism, even religious and quasi-religious community-oriented fervor, may be said to be exemplary of collectivism as any notion of individuality is given up in these instances in favor of the community or group as a whole. In all cases, the surrender of individual identity is not even given a passing thought–and this act of denying one’s individuality for the sake of the greater whole is extolled as a high moral virtue.

In political and economic thought, collectivist ideas underpin socialist and communist systems–where the state or government acts as a steward of resources on behalf of its citizens as a whole. Collectivist philosophers such as Rosseau justify this form of economic and political structure by implying that there is a social contract that defines society–the general good–and the continued existence of such a society is determined along those lines.

Compelling, Comforting, Collectivism

Sounds all well and good, yes? Focusing on its promise, collectivism is a comforting, even compelling idea. In fact, we are exposed every day to collectivist ideas and we don’t even notice anymore how easily we warm up to them. For many people, Church is the most common venue for collectivism: as Christianity and most major religions preach the virtues of sacrifice for the good of your neighbor and the morality of self-denial of individual wants and needs–not to mention the additional proliferation of religious and quasi-religious organizations and communities all trumpeting the same collectivist mantra.

The media is the next most common venue: with TV, print, radio, and the Internet rife with shows, articles, and advertisements using collectivist rhetoric to promote many causes: among the most common: AIDS Awareness, Environmentalism, Post-materialism. Politicians lobbying for one legislation or another designed to help the greater good, or the society at large. Economists and bankers harping about bailouts, stimulus packages, and additional regulations with the aim of protecting and nurturing the the economy as a whole.

Individualism: Afraid Of The Same Thing As Collectivism?

Now for the critics. Individualists (opposite of collectivists) argue that any form of collectivist ideal destroys individuality and diversity in society by imposing a homogenous and arbitrary identity to a society which is a contradiction since society is composed of individuals with free will and respective identities.

Also history has shown (maybe naively) that collectivist societies breed totalitarian and oppressive regimes–as evidenced by the atrocious communist movements in Russia and China and the Nazi movement in Germany. Many of the vocal critics of collectivism such as Friedrich Hayek and Ayn Rand trace life experience to these societies.

Proponents of collectivism offer their own criticism to opponents of collectivism, stating that societies being naturally groups of people–are also naturally collectivist whether collectivism is formally adopted as a political system or not. They also criticize individualist thought as inherently elitist–and also prone to abuse and oppression.

Emma Goldman wrote in criticism of individualism:

‘Rugged individualism’ has meant all the ‘individualism’ for the masters, while the people are regimented into a slave caste to serve a handful of self-seeking ‘supermen.’…Their ‘rugged individualism’ is simply one of the many pretenses the ruling class makes to mask unbridled business and political extortion.”

Interestingly, her statements don’t seem to be that different from George Orwell, who was a staunch advocate of democratic socialism and an opponent of collectivism:

“It cannot be said too often – at any rate, it is not being said nearly often enough – that collectivism is not inherently democratic, but, on the contrary, gives to a tyrannical minority such powers as the Spanish Inquisitors never dreamt of.”

Maybe I’m missing something here: but it seems both the individualists and collectivists are afraid of the same thing: an oppresive minority that gains widespread control of society at the expense of the rights of others. Where the two camps differ is how this oppressive elite comes to fore: either as a result of a deliberate surrender of rights by a collective society, or the selfish unbridled ambitions of individualist elites.

The Borg: The Ultimate Collectivists

Meanwhile, collectivism has also been portrayed quite dramatically in science fiction where one of the most explicit expression and criticism is found in the character of The Borg from the Star Trek series.

One interesting aspect of The Borg Collective is that its development as a race or group of organisms does not depend on individual evolution as would normally be the case but on assimilation of other species with characteristics that are deemed to be beneficial to the collective.

In a philosophical nutshell: these collectivists do not evolve to better themselves, but work simply to acquire and absorb everything else for their collective benefit.

The Borg Collective is portrayed as a virulent and nearly unstoppable villainous force in the Star Trek series and movies–which is interestingly just as collectivist critics would precisely have it.

What the conventional Star Trek viewer easily discounts is that despite the menace The Borg poses in the Star Trek universe–as a species they have been very successful (to the point of efficiently successful) in propagating and expanding its reach. If the Borg hypothesis exemplifies the truest sense of collectivism, the potential benefits to a species are very great (note that The Borg far outclasses the Federation in all encounters).

The catch: to be truly collectivist and erase all individuality is to become totally removed from what we can consider “human society” and be closer to an insect hive. Very successful, very efficient, very alien.

(see videos below “The Borg Documentary” in 3 parts) (more…)

Read Full Post »