The Arrogance of Humanity

This video juxtaposed with the one below reflects a core of arrogance in our humanity. Missing in both is a shred of enlightened thought or empathy. Both on the other hand, are expressions of our own primitive instinct to establish mercilessly, our superiority over other beings, human and animal alike.

This is the same core of our being that Republicans celebrate when they talk about individual responsibility. It is the fundamental cost of the process of unrestrained, free-form civilization.

, , ,

  1. #1 by Double Ought on September 13, 2008 - 8:14 am

    Well Cliff, these animals are being culled by Fish and Wildlife anyway as a part of a management regimen. Considering Alaska has managed to stabilize it wildlife populations rather well,(unlike many states) and there is no problem with the number of animals, it seems nothing but emotionalism to point to her advocating making money on aerial hunting.

    It makes money for the continuing management costs to keep these populations stable.

    As for the video, do we want a vice president that understands what killing is all about?
    Yes indeed. It makes for a leader of peoples that understands what the consequence of such behavior is really all about. People who understand what needs to be done, don’t screw around for 8 years getting job done that should take at most a couple of years, in a manner that gets all kinds of extra people killed. If you are going to kill, do it efficiently.

    Having lived there, life in Alaska can be pretty raw outside the comforts of Anchorage, the reality to life in the lower 48 is night and day.

    Ever watch an over-population of wolves eat ungulates alive in the dead of winter? Life in Alaska is still Hobbesian, “nasty, brutal, and short”. As evidence, the stats on moose making it to adulthood in Alaska in 1 in 40 born. In years where wolf populations increase, they haven’t a prayer.

    So on with aerial management, utilizing paying customers to do the culling. Very paint the fence Tom Sawyer saavy, don’t you think?

    It is rather obvious that progressives are terrified of what this woman means to the Obama campaign. She is 100% real, not a media creation.

  2. #2 by cav, an anon's anon on September 13, 2008 - 8:24 am

    She’s just like me, we sit next to one another at the bar and P.T..A. I’m told I like Geo, Sarah and John and Dick, actually want them to represent me to the world. I’m told we’re the same. Have a beer, at the the gun range.

    Yet somehow I know I’m not one to rule the world! Couldn’t be dragged kicking or screaming into it. Who’s disconnected from reality?

    I don’t think there should even be levels of incompetence above a certain point, so if these people really seek it out, it is beyond arrogance and well into insanity. Hardly community servioce.

    I’ll go look up ‘Megalomania’.

  3. #3 by Double Ought on September 13, 2008 - 8:37 am

    Cav; Has it dawned on you yet that this woman was governor of Alaska, and she certainly didn’t seek the job, but was chosen?

    Please explain to me what qualifications someone like Nancy Pelosi has to be 3rd in line to the president.

    This is the democracy everyone is enamored of here in the US. With the state of affairs this last 8 years, there are not many anywhere in our government that could proclaim qualified success.

    Bush was governor of Texas, Clinton of Arkansas, look at what we got in those two. I can only admonish that no one knows what Palin can accomplish, and besides, unlike the two losers I mentioned, she is on the ticket for veep, not president.

    The shrill attacks on her are not effective, which is why if you had not noticed, Obama has shut the hell up about it, and is trying to reign in the rest of the idiots that attack her to no effect while McCain gets a free ride.

    Once again, this is all that moron Deans fault. I should run the campaign. I do believe I mentioned from day one, that it would be best for the left to simply ignore Palin, but noooo, they had to to go ahead and make her a superstar, and completely alienate anyone that was on the fence.

  4. #4 by Cliff Lyon on September 13, 2008 - 9:57 am

    Double O (Glenn),

    I have no problem with hunting, and I fully appreciate the need to facilitate balance in a broken eco-system. And they are not mutually exclusive.

    But one is about our ecological balance, and the other about sport, in this case sports entertainment.

    It is soo ingrained in ‘western blood’ to make carnival of nature.

    We have not evolved. There is zero thinning effect, and zero sport involved aerial hunting.

    Why can’t we be more like the British, who seem to have preserved at least some, however cynical, ‘sporting’ character to paid excursion hunting.

    But here’s what was for me, the more significant message; To be civilized is to distiguish ourselves from animals.

    Civilizations core premise is that we must conquer nature so that we are no longer subject to its vagaries.

    But that definition of civilization does not speak to how we treat each other.

    That is the civilization evoked in ‘civilized behavior’. And that is where the bar lies for enlightened behavior. Its a low bar.

    Is shooting a wild animal from an airplane civilized behavior? I would argue, it is marginally less civilized than than going off road to do doughnuts in pristine wilderness. It disrespects nature, and it offends the sensibilites of people who worship nature and the environment. Its is not sport. Hunting in a zoo is more humane.

    Aerial hunting is akin to renting a small suburban block for a day and paying someone to drive you around the block bashing mailboxes with your seat belt on.

    Civilization happens at the expense of nature.

    Enlightened civilization celebrates nature.

  5. #5 by Double Ought on September 13, 2008 - 10:27 am

    Killing is killing, get over it. It is never a sport in my mind. Hunters celebrate nature far more than most. The sport aspect of killing is purely subjective, fish and game and Palin are simply making money to enable the management. Anyone who understands this and has killed for profit, to feed themselves understands this. If they enjoy it, that is a side benefit.

    In Alaska, as in all states if you kill things and do not take them for use, it is called “wanton waste” and is a felony.

    Keep in mind the first conservationists were hunters.

    Does a pack of wolves eating its prey alive respect nature? Act accordingly. If the people that consider it sport to kill wolves from aircraft think it is, it is. Those wolves are to be killed anyway from a plane by Fish and Game officers. By the time someone wants to kill an animal out of an airplane given the opportunity to do so, your brand of heart on your sleeve teaching, is long gone.

    Bottom line, it costs money to run Fish and Game, Palin supports the means of getting the money where there wasn’t any before. Boy do we need that kind of thinking in government, NOW!

  6. #6 by Double Ought on September 13, 2008 - 10:30 am

    Since you moderate it on the other post about the draft, check this.

    Here is what the World Socialist Web Site considers will happen when Obama is elected. These are the true progressives of the world, that stand for labor and observe events from that perspective, not like the pretenders like on this site.

    It’s going to get chilly, no matter who gets elected. Might as well elect a guy who understands the military, knows killing, like Palin, because it appears we are headed there, even if bubbles is elected. In fact since the psychopath Brezezinski is Obamas adviser, it could be worse under his tutelage.

  7. #7 by Cliff Lyon on September 13, 2008 - 10:37 am

    Killing is killing, get over it.

    Very good Glenn. Was there an object in that sentence?

  8. #8 by Double Ought on September 13, 2008 - 10:57 am

    No object buddy. If you mean to kill, for the dead animal it doesn’t matter if you have a reason, honor it, revere it, or disrespect it. Dead is dead. What you describe is all a man made series of social constructs. For a person who doesn’t believe in a higher power, would seem you are a bit confused and conflicted.

    In addition I am not Glenn. There are more than a few people that have read your tripe and use this connection. Glenn has shown us what is going on in the progressive community, it is open season on you guys, if you know what I mean.

  9. #9 by Cliff Lyon on September 13, 2008 - 12:00 pm

    Ah yes, Hoefer, you are not Glenn, I see that dear. How is Double today?

    Does Double feel like how we kill matters?

  10. #10 by cav, an anon's anon on September 13, 2008 - 2:09 pm

    Doubleought, My point is that neither is Pelosi, not Gore, certainly not Romney, not any of them are qualified. Nor would any of us do it well. The very niche’ has come into being as a result of a system that for some reason seems to need just one more level stacked on top. It is my opinion that as that pinnicle has risen, the very sense of it, has outstripped what a human being has the capacity to effectively or justly perform. It is a preposterous test of how power corrupts, and as we persue a mighty, one world ‘government’ we’ll see even greater corruption. Were that it was otherwise.

    Now maybe some of the aspirants know the taste of blood. They’d be on the button over Black ops, stacks of exotic armaments, etc. Your suggested requirement of honor and respect for sane outcomescan can in no way be assured. I don’t see it as a case of bigger being better and biggest ibeing best. More dangerous than that. We need to reign in the whole goofy race for supremacy before it busts us all. Ratchet down the divisive and fearsome.

  11. #11 by jdberger on September 13, 2008 - 3:19 pm

    Why can’t we be more like the British, who seem to have preserved at least some, however cynical, ’sporting’ character to paid excursion hunting.

    Driven bird shoots and fox hunts are “sporting”?

    Don’t really know much about what you’re talking about, do you, Cliff?

    Not that it’s terribly suprising….

    Look – I hunt. I don’t hunt predators. I figure it’s a professional courtesy.

    But, I don’t have a problem killing nuisance predators (there was once this pack of coyotes that culled the neighbohood cat population). Folks who live in proximity to wolves aren’t usually big fans. Folks that live in nice urban areas where the closest they get to a pack of wolves is the local dog park seem to often want to dictate how “rural bumpkins” are permitted to protect their livelihood.

    Finally, shooting a moving animal from a moving platform is damn difficult.

  12. #12 by Oprahs' Orifice on September 13, 2008 - 5:00 pm

    If killing is allowed, and is done expeditiously with skill, it doesn’t matter how. In any case of any kind of killing it doesn’t matter to the creature being killed, they all want to live, no matter the pain, or how long it takes for them to die.

    It is telling, since I have killed many wild creatures, many en masse for commercial profit in unregulated environments and have seen their survival behavior. When one does this it becomes very apparent that no creature wishes to be “put out of its misery”, it wishes to live. It does not understand in my opinion, that it can never recover.

    It is the inexperienced human that thinks it is the best idea to kill a maimed creature so it doesn’t suffer, but in my experience, the creature certainly does not wish to be killed, it struggles to be free of its killer, however maimed, until it is dispatched.

    It does not acquiesce to the logic of anthropomorphic human thinking, whether it is chickens, fish, or maimed wild animals.

    It, all of it, wants to live.

    This all said, I do not advocate to prolonging of animals lives that you desire to kill, this is torture, and symptomatic of mental illness. If on the other hand you wish to save it, and rehabilitate it, then suffer it must.

  13. #13 by cav, an anon's anon on September 13, 2008 - 6:44 pm

    I just wanted to add two things to my ‘rejection of the big govt trope’ above: Corporations cannot fill that role either. & Bashing the little lady for what ever reason is OK. Heard the term Swiftboat? She’ll fade fast enough when the Mighty McCain, bomber of Viet children, is shot down once again.

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: