Cutest little white toy poodle you ever saw
I run over him with the left front tire
I felt the bump
but I did not feel anything when he passed under the drive axels
I don't think there would have been much left of him or her except a greasy spot on the road
I love rode kill
some people think it's a shame
But I take joy in decay
So many eidetic images from childhood
Dead rats with maggots
funky smelling cellars
Some people think decay is sad
but I think henry miller nailed it
I been wondering whether the dead do know anything
I have heard that the last thing to go is our sense of smell
wouldn't that be ironic
funky posts
this morning
decay and road kill
cluster fucks and
neo assyrians
blogging studio eight I guess
decadence
root must be in decay
I am loosing my cool
I must be average
I think I will play Hunter Thompson for a while
See the world through his eyes
Maybe I should get drunk first
I don't mind that he blew his brains out
Well I did not have to clean up after him
But his kids loved him dearly
they did not mind either
Maybe they hire one of those crime scene clean up companies
What is on my clip board does it have anything to do with this,
neo conservative neo assyrians
The intoxication of perpetual war
Danny Postel: You characterise the outlook of the Bush administration as a kind of realism, in the spirit of Thrasymachus and Machiavelli. But isn’t the real divide within the administration (and on the American right more generally) more complex: between foreign policy realists, who are pragmatists, and neo-conservatives, who see themselves as idealists – even moralists – on a mission to topple tyrants, and therefore in a struggle against realism?
Shadia Drury: I think that the neo-conservatives are for the most part genuine in wanting to spread the American commercial model of liberal democracy around the globe. They are convinced that it is the best thing, not just for America, but for the world. Naturally, there is a tension between these “idealists” and the more hard-headed realists within the administration.
I contend that the tensions and conflicts within the current administration reflect the differences between the surface teaching, which is appropriate for gentlemen, and the ‘nocturnal’ or covert teaching, which the philosophers alone are privy to. It is very unlikely for an ideology inspired by a secret teaching to be entirely coherent.
The issue of nationalism is an example of this. The philosophers, wanting to secure the nation against its external enemies as well as its internal decadence, sloth, pleasure, and consumption, encourage a strong patriotic fervour among the honour-loving gentlemen who wield the reins of power. That strong nationalistic spirit consists in the belief that their nation and its values are the best in the world, and that all other cultures and their values are inferior in comparison.
Irving Kristol, the father of neo-conservatism and a Strauss disciple, denounced nationalism in a 1973 essay; but in another essay written in 1983, he declared that the foreign policy of neo-conservatism must reflect its nationalist proclivities. A decade on, in a 1993 essay, he claimed that “religion, nationalism, and economic growth are the pillars of neoconservatism.” (See “The Coming ‘Conservative Century’”, in Neoconservatism: the autobiography of an idea, p. 365.)