Read some Stirling Newberry; Call me in the morning

( – promoted by buhdydharma )

Obama’s Nobel speech was horrendous to progessives, unless you embrace what Stirling Newberry called “the facts,” (my emphasis)  some time ago.  It’s not easy reading.  Try to digest it.  I’m still trying.

Here.

There is nothing facile about our work ahead.  

And forget about Obamabots.  They don’t matter.  Only Your Understanding and Your Conscience still count.  Understanding first, conscience second.  That’s logical, no?

It’s probably too late to even try, due to the excesses of Wall Street (see Ilargi and Stoneleigh, whom you’ll find at theautomaticearth.com).

As so-called progessives, can we please vet Monsieur Stirling?  He sounds like the staightest arrow in the quiver.  Well?  Any takers?

Thomas Freidman was exultant about an unmanned drone getting in Europe’s face to accept the peace prize on Obama’s behalf.

You tell me, what’s that about.

hugs and kisses, meant truly, mon ami.

CF

17 comments

Skip to comment form

  1. I am asking for your explicit guidance here, I.e., your critique of war and peace economies.  

    (my grandma never did needle-work on demand, and I expect no more or less from you…but if you have thoughts, feel free to expound…)

    • Edger on December 12, 2009 at 1:46 pm

    It doesn’t go down easy. Tough and gristly. Hard to chew on, yet purely theoretical. No consideration of the fact that war economies have another major product.

    Dead and mangled bodies all over the place.

    • taoskier on December 13, 2009 at 12:19 am

    …tried not too hard as I am about to go out for a pint.

    Newberry seems like someone with a capacity to form intelligent sounding gibberish.

    The elements of of his theory are totally of his own choosing.

    Time to go for that pint…or two.

  2. and does a nice job here explaining how America is exporting inflation to maintain some semblance of economic stability here at home.

    Sterling’s glitch is he likes to make sweeping historical claims but has trouble dealing with folks who deign to challenge the factual bases for these claims.

    I say this from first hand experience of about five years ago.  I made the mistake of challenging Sterling on his old blog with a series of six or seven detailed comments full of linky goodness about some arcane aspect of Cold War econ theory that didn’t jibe with some grand theory he was propounding.

    After a long back and forth over a couple of days, Sterling’s final response was to called me a troll, ban me from his site, and summarily delete all of my posts.

    To this day, Sterling’s blog is the only one I’ve ever been banned from.

     

Comments have been disabled.