Unlimited

growth is a contradictio in terminus indeed. Think cancer. And the old saying: what goes up, has to come down. Unless it's a rocket lost in outer space.
Glad I discovered this blog: a fun site in the best sense of the word.

Like

sitting in a café, having a good glass of port and light banter with friends. Might be tempted to visit the big Apple on my next holiday. Cities are not my favorites.

Added

some comments to older posts too. As for the smelly bed:
buy a new one
spray with the stuff that is used on smelly clothes
sprinkle with soda, gentle rub in, leave for 12 hours, then hoover.
You're welcome...

Joanne

A little strange comments, why now?

Haha. Besides, a fruit salad is traditional, healthy and quite sustainable.

Pefko, try to find out who's joanne H. I'll cover your back.

Coen

I think he or she is a reader of this site and made op her or his mind.

Coen

Never forget that Arnon’s blog has a lot of silent readers, i think this one is reading from the beginning and never dared to post a comment.
2008 is almost over now, and now he or she dares to post.
I see this person as an ‘opkropper’
But, what happened?

Okay. Good job, Pefko.

Everything under control overhere.

Attention, thats it all about i'm afraid

Christmas and Economics

This is a somewhat touchy blog (except for the “all of a sudden” adds posted on it).
Funny how a story about someone eating with an economist can make one realize that economics and Christmas are eventually the same in the end; both about what people really need; although I personally didn’t have a fruit salad on Christmas eve, I had a traditional meal with family and ones again thought about the purity of pacifism, and how its peculiar that there only seems to be a stop of war or hate (in western civilization that is) on this one day, the celebration of an uncertain birth.
Like to wish everyone a wonderful Christmas day

@Kevino Class
Me too I believe in the purity of pacifism; one can say pacifism is a kind of Puritanism. Maybe that is why I have some reservations about pacifism and Puritanism in general.
(By the way, my first thoughts about your name, it made me think about some new Russian class of war ships. But no offence meant.)

Bernard F

Non taken.
Just wondering why the name Kevino made you think of Russian battleships (of something from Russia at all), and how one can compare a peaceful state of politics and ideas about non-violence lifestyles, or state of life if you like, to a specific and deep religious form of Christianity, which deals with a different scale of social angles. In a way I believe all pacifists are agnostics by forehand. I believe you have a certain kind of people who believe Jesus was a true pacifist, but these people aren’t puritans, and if Jesus was a pacifist, in my opinion he was a poor pacifist. There’s a bigger chance he was nothing more than a gifted and charismatic Rabbi. Like Che Guevara was a gifted and charismatic guerilla.
And John Lennon a gifted and charismatic singer songwriter (more a pacifist by any means).
An anthropologist ones told me that a working and lasting form of pacifism can only be formed when a situation of global doom occurs, ‘like in the week before a meteor of gigantic proportions will crumble the earth. Than you’ll either have a world full of aggressive anarchy, or something which comes close to Utopia. The way people fulfill there ultimate needs in the end, is unpredictable, but I’d guess you’ll experience true pacifism.’
A nice optimistic opinion, but a pessimistic Christmas thought.

@Kevino
(Kevino Class sounded a bit like Kresta Class Cruisers – just particular association of mine)
Doomsday - you mean something like: after WO II people believed that the invention of the atomic bomb will put an end to all wars and stimulate pacifism? They were wrong, of course.
Ok, I did not want to refer to the old religious group of Puritanism, but to Puritanism as a kind of excessive black and white thinking. There were numerous people and groups calling themselves Pacifists: from Tolstoy to Bertrand Russel (see Wikipedia). And it always ends with ‘the others are not the true pacifists’.
My dear mother too called herself a true pacifist: she lectured me for hours for wanting to have a toy gun as a child. Words can be a nasty form of aggression too. (And in the end, they always beat the shit out of you.)
So that is why I have reservations about pacifism (and also about its counterpart, militarism, of course).
By the way, John Lennon could be quite violent when drunk (they say).

bernard f

Even still, I find the name-link hopelessly strange, apart from the word “class,” which is a poor American translation, there are absolutely no similarities. Maybe there’s a militaristic being dwelling in your subconscious, and maybe you have your mother to thank for this. Also there’s an inherent difference between the example put forth by the anthropologist in my add, and the one in yours (the atomic bomb is a human formed weapon, which one can choose to use, or not; a meteor crushing the earth on the other hand, would create the threatening of a non-human form of violence, which, in the quite optimistic theory of this man, would trigger a non-human form of civilization: pacifism).
Pacifism has nothing to do with black and white thinking, it’s quite a grey area, and therefore nothing with your definition of Puritanism, the Wikipedia-lecture should teach you this.

Words can indeed be a nasty form of aggression, and when used in commands even trigger violence, but they never “are” violence, so how could they “beat the shit out of someone?” You probably mean metaphorically, but still I don’t get it within the context, to me it’s a mystery why you brought up the whole urge of defining this.

Pacifism can only be pure in ideas, within words, within repressing sudden impulses. There is nothing violence about a boy imitating war, as long as he knows he’s imitating

I hope your mother by now gets the difference between a Quentin Tarantino movie, and the war in Afghanistan; between the manlike ideal of a boy playing with a toy gun, and the sacrifices of the Normandy landing.

P.S.

John Lennon indeed could be violent when drunk (according to an L.A. waitress back in ’74, and a Liverpudlian DJ in ‘63 ), but all I was trying to say, is that of the three names named (Jezus C. / Che G. / John L.) he contributed most pacifistic vibes, or, if you choose to look at it from another angle, created the least violence. Of course he used the platonic weapon called music, which is always good.

@Kevino
(There is indeed a militaristic being dwelling in my ‘sub’consciousness).
But why do you call pacifism ’a non-human form of civilization’?
If ‘Pacifism can only be pure in ideas, within words, within repressing sudden impulses.’ How can it work in a human word?
I bring this up because my mother for example, who considered herself a true pacifist, also was not successful to change the world with her words: she could not convince me to throw away my toy gun, and in a final act of despair, to preserve her family in her idealized non-violent home, she indeed ordered my father to beat the shit out of me, manually.
That is how I perceive plain idealism and its consequences; that is way puritans of all kind are always doomed to react, I am afraid.
I agree - now I understand you - that John Lennon, provoked the least violence, in his name.

Kevino, all this does not want to say that I believe you will react the same in the future. Only to make you aware that even the best intentions sometimes provoke the greatest violence. That’s all. It is my personal and simple testimony and comment.

bernard f

First of all, the add wasn’t about intentions, it was about the purity of pacifism (and your doubts over this).
I call pacifism a non-human form of civilization, because it inflicts with human nature (hoping that I don’t have to explain to you, why human-nature and the ideals of pacifism don’t go together; you can read history books if you want to know why).
I don’t understand the sentence: “how can it work in a human word.” Aren’t words part of a human idea of communication, and therefore the only thing that can be understood in a global manner? Or did you mean “world” perhaps?
Anyway, I never suggested pacifism “works,” I only altered an hypothetic situation which could create an atmosphere in which it ‘might’ work. And I find the thought of people being true pacifists a nice thought. ‘You may say I’m a dreamer,’ Lennon wrote ironically, ‘but I’m not the only one.’

If your mother indeed ordered your father to “beat the shit” out of you manually, and calls herself a pacifist, there’s something sincerely wrong with your mother, not with the way pacifism can manifest itself.
But I see how this youth trauma can make one bitter over such a thing as pacifism.
I would like to thank you for your personal testimony and comment; and a happy new year.

P.S.

War is over (if you want it).

@ Kevino

You wrote:

"Pacifism can only be pure in ideas, within words, within repressing sudden impulses. There is nothing violence about a boy imitating war, as long as he knows he’s imitating ."

Words are always reffering to other texts/words. What can be pure in a word??

Tell me, how concious were you about your imitations as a young lad?

You wrote:
"I hope your mother by now gets the difference between a Quentin Tarantino movie, and the war in Afghanistan; between the manlike ideal of a boy playing with a toy gun, and the sacrifices of the Normandy landing. "

Bernards mother died earlier this year. So your hope is in vain.
Your words sound very aggresive if I may say so. Is that what you are aiming at, sounding aggresive? If so, may I ask why. What is troubling you?

@Kevino
Yes, you have to read ‘world’, sorry my mistake.
I do not doubt ‘the purity of pacifism’, I only doubtful about ‘purity’. Its sounds too much like fundamentalism or Puritanism, if you wish, that is all. I sincerely think there is something wrong with any wish for purity – there was a intense wish for purity inside my mother, that was wrong about her.
Happy times for you too!
@Jeanette
Thank you, but I see and I take no offence. Wish you the best.

jeanette p.

I didn’t wrote: pacifism can only be pure within words… I meant the idea-of-pacifism.
Words can be pure when they are spoken or written by someone who is sincerely trying to define or show something, in my opinion.
I don’t agree that words are always referring to other text or words; if that were to be true, than no one could write something original (dodging the word ‘pure’ here), and I think there are a lot of people who’s writing is quite original, and who’s words therefore do not refer to other texts or words.

When I was a boy (let’s say around ten years old) I sometimes played warfare with a toy gun, and I knew perfectly well that when I yelled ‘pang, pang!’ and “shot” a friend of mine, that this friend (who fell theatrically to the ground) did not die the way people in real life die. I knew that later on he would be quite alive to have diner.

I didn’t know Bernards mom passed away, he didn’t write: my mom, rest her soul, etc.
Maybe because of this fact you find my tone aggressive, but I was simply dealing with the insights about his mother which he gave me, and connecting them to certain points of view. My aim wasn’t about ‘sounding aggressive,’ there wasn’t an ‘aim’ at all.

I simply didn’t understand how one could link my name to Russian warships, and pacifism to Puritanism, and I hoped that, through this innocent discussion, I could learn more about this. So one could say: there’s nothing troubling me but curiosity.

bernard f

I guess we can agree that purity in the form of blind dedication, or a kind of unrealistic wishful thinking, can be quite dangerous indeed.

Have yourself a good train trip, and indeed you should read ‘a perfect day for bananafish,’ according to Vivian Darkbloom it defined a whole new standard for the short story’s in ‘the new yorker’ magazine.

@ Kevino

Curiosity is a gift!
About purity/originality of words: maybe you would like to read a bit about "differance and Derrida" (the English wikipedia-entry is not that bad on this subject). I'm curious if you'll come to a different conclusion.
cheers,