史的唯物論

Regarding the Content of this Journal:

All entries are meant to be private expressions of opinions to be shared with online friends and acquaintances. Since this is a journal and entries aren't necessarily coherent arguments but merely a train of thought as loosely represented by words and occasionally images, some viewpoints are of an exploratory nature. The author does not claim journalistic integrity nor objectivity - the readers should judge by themselves.

I am not to be held responsible for comments made by other users, since I did not type, write, compose, or in any way create them.


Friending:

Most of the entries in this journal are locked. Locked posts are meant to be read by people who are on my Friends' List, and therefore should not be disseminated in any way, shape or form.

While I understand that some people use the Friends List as a reading list, I use this as a personal journal. Please let me know - whether in this post or in a PM - if you would like to be added.

Sorry. I'm doing a small f-list cut now. It is nothing personal - I would prefer to be able to comment on the journals that I keep on my flist more often, so...

Please let me know if you'd like to stay, and maybe we can chat it out?

Ch.1 Men of the 1820s.

Decemberists and the aftermath: Alexander dies, Tsar Nicholas I: “Gerdame of Europe” following the Congress of Vienna, ruling autocrat style.

• Pavlov: Bringing Shelling into Russian philosophy. Dubbed “Russian Shelling”. “Every phenomenon is the externalization of an inner essence.”

• Vellansky's students: Truth arose out of interaction of matter and ideas. Vellansky credited as introducing binary forces dialectically interacting with each other.

• Davydov & Galich: Shellingists. Fallout of Decemberists: Nicholas I becomes even more autocratic. Shuts down departments of philosophy; philosophers often have to go under other departments. Davydov: On philosophy as a science; Galich: Taught Shelling; not a Shellingist. Survey of ancient Indian philosophy. Demoted to book-keeping; became alcoholic.

• Prince Odoevsky: Conservative, but advocated education as Russia is backwards. Proposed examinations in moral & social competance on the nobility; Plato-tendencies.

• Chaadev: Russia has no cultural past (compared to Western Europe --> modernity) due to Orthodox Church and Tsarism. Believes that Russia should have followed the Catholic Church as it would have exposed Russia to the Renaissance. “There is a regime for the spirit just as there is a regime for the body; one has to know how to submit to it. [...]The point is that we have not walked alongside other peoples; we don't belong to any of the great families of the human race; we are neither of the West nor the East, and we have the tradition of neither one nor the other. As if we were situated outside time, the universal education of the human race has not reached us yet.” Reason as a chief concern of Chaadev's, “love of truth” versus the lack of interest in individual dignity under Tsardom. (Serfdom regarded as a Russian barbarity in Western eyes.)

Personal thought:

• It appears that Tsarist autocracy stifled philosophical thought pretty much in a similar way to Stalinism stifling philosophical thought.

• Philosophy is ultimately political in nature, for changes in how one views reality and ultimate reality changes one's belief in how things should be, especially when there is a contradiction between reality as is versus reality as it is dreamt to be via implication of ultimate reality (in the case of Shellingists, some form of Spirit).

• During this period, there appears to be a general trend towards embracing nature, and wanting to discover more of the “trivial truths” which others know but which are opaque to Russians (retardation of scientific development).

• Precursor to dialectical materialism: the nature of dialectics; conflicting forces form reality as-is, and determines the direction to which it is moving. (Is there any difference from Hegelian philosophy? IDGI.)

• Dilemma of the Russian intellectual post-Decemberists: A mixture of love for one's country as being denied by the autocrat Tsar, combined with the relative backwardness of the country not only in terms of lack of education, but also reactionary arbitrary dictates against reason.

Posting here because apparently my IJ has been inactive for too long.
Somebody I knew once said, "in Russian philosophy, it is crucial only to know two kinds: Slavophiles and Westernizers". To be honest, the feeling of being "trapped between east and west" appears striking.

I'm sorry. I have not forgotten that this exists. It's just that it feels a bit lonely in here. And since the people I know on here have LJs, I usually just post to LJ anyway. (For the record, my lj username is rubashov.)

Some mundane things which I'm sort of happy about:

1. I got a new phone and it has a decent camera. At night, I dream of fantastical landscapes that I've never seen before in real life, and what amuses me a great deal is that I keep wanting to take photos of those landscapes with that phone. 日有所思，夜有所梦, hohoho.

2. Sometimes I help my dad do some mundane things at my aunt's stall (which is closing in August). I have to lug around bags of groceries, and what with security people at the subway (and my fondness for cargo green clothes), I keep fantasizing that I'm going to be stopped for a search, at which point I'll reply (it would never work out in real life if I want my neck intact), "Actually, I'm just delivering food supplies to my non-revolutionary bourgeoisie capitalist aunt's."

3. Kungfu Panda was a great movie. Okay, not great. But it was enjoyable when it came to cinematography.
I also watched a couple of anime. Higurashi no naku koro ni (When the cicadas cry) was particularly engaging, and I also watched Girl's High. It was cute. But now I can't watch any other anime without being incredibly bored, because Higurashi was just that good.

4. I've taken up an interest in military strategies. It's probably nothing great, but damn, it's a good excuse to play Red Alert in isometric. For some reason, I can't bring myself to play the games that have nothing to do with actual history, so the rest of C&C First Decade DVD is pretty much lost on me anyway. I just bought it for the soviets, tbqh.

5. I just got a haircut, and as usual it looks like meloncat. I blame my genes for the thick hair. I would rather be a balding old man!

6. I came to conclusions about transcendental idealism based on pretty much Husserlian philosophy and Natural Attitude. Interiority of thought exists, but on another plane that is not separate from the material world. Ultimate Reality is a false construct of philosophy. Basically. I can't imagine love as anything but a platonic ideal; if it doesn't last, then it never existed. Everything is still rooted in materialism, but this inherent sense of transcendance cannot be denied (especially in mathematics).

7. I got tired of arguing with Stalinists and just want to discuss theory with other ... less absolutist people. :| lol, I even argued with a Stalinist who said, "Don't lecture me on the history of my own country." I was like, "Orly?" Yeah, yeah, I try not to be an ignorant foreigner. But I draw the line at whereever I deem reasonable. (Do unto others, something something - Confucious)
Admittedly, it's not that many. There's just something about Stalinism that I find inherently distasteful (while it's not as bad as the west claims, I'll grant this).

8. I have an L pendant on a chain! I now wear it around.

9. I've made it through 2 more chapters of How It All Began and was terribly amused by the fact that Bukharin has a SWEET TOOTH. Seriously, the parallels between Rubashov from Darkness At Noon and Bukharin, in terms of personality, are just very uncanny. I was also creeped out at how, despite having not finished either book, I associated the two in my mind so strongly. I'd like to think that this isn't confirmation bias, but the more I read of the two books, the more similarities I find...
Anyway, why was I amused by the fact that he has a sweet tooth? Because, toffees. tarawriter sent me some caramel thingy (Werner's?). Next time when I eat it, I'll eat it with young Kolya in mind ;)

10. After talking with a friend, I sort of gained some sense of short-term goals and direction. Besides a vague sense of "I must graduate and be a corporate peon working with nothing to do with my major", or "I must somehow get into graduate studies even though it's impossible financially or even logically."

11. I just scrolled back 120 entries on the f-list. WHERE ARE THE PEOPLE :(((((

12. School is starting come August. :(

13. I has new laptop! One that doesn't take 20 minutes to start up! YAY. On the down side, I've signed up with the devil of an internet service provider to get this laptop, woe is me.

I spend too much time online. Guess I'll attend the Internet Addicts Anonymous on IRC one of these days*))


*Joking, and largely fictitious. But it's true that I need to spend less time online, deadlines are coming like a swarm of bees. Laser charging bees.

Oh yeah, this is my Boycott post (I will probably post to IJ in the meantime).

Anton Nosik has posted some clarifications in English... Read the comments page for backpedaling and blatant lies. Meanwhile, LJ Staff over at lj_2008 has apologized for violating their own protocol:

At this point we are working on a solution to enable existing LiveJournal users to create new Basic accounts as so many of you have requested. Nothing has been decided yet, but we are considering options which would allow existing users to continue to create new Basic accounts.

Also note:

Subscriptions – Should moderators be able to charge for access to closed communities?

As for participation on IJ's off_topic_cafe during the strike... I probably would be online only sporadically (which is the main reason for the lack of comments/posts btw), so in all likelihood I won't be able to do that either. It's great that almost everyone I know on IJ is doing it, but on LJ... -_-

Am I the only one who despises how much the exodus from LJ is linked with fandom? Not in the sense that I don't like fandom (I'm OK with it and it's an integral part of the internet), but in the sense that anything associated with it, regardless of whether it actually is a part of fandom or a more general notion, gets shunted aside as whining. Grr. :(

I have been in the party since I was eighteen, and the purpose of my life has always been to fight for the interests of the working class, for the victory of socialism... If, more than once, I was mistaken about the methods of building socialism, let posterity judge me no more harshly than Vladimir Illich did. We were moving toward a single goal for the first time, on a still unblazed trail. Other times, other customs. Pravda carried a discussion page, everyone argued, searched for ways and means, quarrelled and made up and moved on together. Know, comrades, that on that banner which you will be carrying in the victorious march to communism, is also my drop of blood. - Bukharin's last testament, as quoted in The Tragedy of Bukharin, Donny Gluckstein

Recently, the discovery of a Marxist Leninist forum has led me to contemplate further issues on Marxism and socialism. I cannot express how much it hurts me to know that there are people who hark towards Stalinist Soviet Union as the victory of Marxist-Leninism. In practice, Leninism is not the same as Stalinism - I don't understand how anybody can even come to think of Stalin as being the right successor to Lenin.

In the 1920s, when the regime was at its weakest, Lenin was forced to adopt harsh measures against counterrevolutionaries... Yet with one broad stroke, Stalinists have claimed that Marxist-Leninism is Stalinist and that there is no difference. Lenin never made it a point to rid of the Old Bolsheviks who were there at the revolution; he tolerated dissent within the party ranks. The entire premise on which Stalinist claims to be Leninist in nature begins to crumble when it comes to the
execution of the Old Bolsheviks and the Great Purge
. By the end of the Great Purges, prominent Old Bolsheviks were either in exile or dead; in Lenin's final testament, he expressed horror at the power which Stalin had accumulated in his hands, and demanded further decentralization. Stalin went in open defiance of Lenin's will by increasing party membership without decentralizing measures, thus ensuring the increased power of his bureaucracy.

The oppressiveness of Stalinism relies on its justification as to the extent to which the purges and Moscow Trials were necessary. One only needs to look at the case of Bukharin to know that Stalinist oppression is entirely unjustified: He did not breach party standards of democratic centralism, and as such, need not have been eliminated. The final charges against him leveled by Stalin and his party bureaucrats were not only preposterous; it was logistically impossible. There was no reason to murder the "right deviationists" when they neither breached party discipline nor persisted in opposition.

When it comes to revolution, one may look towards Lenin as having established an astute method. In the long run, Stalinist authoritarianism cannot prevail. Totalitarianism can halt progressive elements within a society which has traditionally been predisposed towards unquestioning obedience; such is the case with Vietnam and China, who are above all Confucianists moreso than Communists.

However, a system which solidifies and is rigid by nature will be unable to respond appropriately towards that which wishes for reform. Should reform prove impossible, then sooner or later, the dissatisfied elements of the system will seek to undermine the structure which denies the validity of their sincere efforts. To whit, authoritarianism in the case of Imperial China prevented modernization. Similarly, authoritarianism within church hierarchies, by dismissing Luther's concerns towards the sale of Indulgences and other church practices, caused the previously conciliatory Luther to radicalize. A similar analogy can be drawn towards the failure of Prague Spring: Dubcek enjoyed genuine popularity among the people as did his reform policies; the popularity of the Communist party was unprecendented. With the reversion to traditional authoritarianism and means of oppression, by 1989, the people were no longer expecting their needs to be met within socialism.

With regards to Marxism, socialist society may be better analysed in terms of Prague Spring's reformist elements in 1968. This entails building a bridge between modern, progressive elements - particularly, reconciliating with the humanist tradition. Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs is one important thesis in sociology; when basic needs are fulfilled, the individual needs, above all, social and intellectual freedom. Under capitalist society, this freedom is an inaccessible privilege as social and intellectual freedom is not easily accessible to all. By contrast, real freedom resides in the annihilation of unequal production relations, and therefore true freedom is available only under post-capitalist society.

In communist society there will be absolute freedom of the 'personality'; any kind of external regulation of relations between men will be absent, and self-activity without compulsion will therefore exist. -- Economics of the Transitional Period, Nikolai Bukharin

Stalinism violates this freedom.

However, even if the means of production is in the hands of the proletariat, there will still remain individual differences and differences between groups which are no longer formed by virtue of socio-economic status (and hence power), but by virtue of differences that are natural to individuals. People can have multiple allegiances; bearing one does not make them any less of a socialist. The revolutionary process deals with the question of basic needs and redistributes social and economical hierarchy; yet they do not, by any means, automatically diminish the basics of ethnicity, gender, sexual preferences, etc. Oppression by virtue of these may still exist, and should rightfully be prevented, or at least regulated. The problem with bourgeoisie politics is the barrier towards political power by virtue of uneven distribution of wealth. In socialist society, political power should be radically distributed amongst all elements of society, as there is no longer an unequal distribution of wealth, and it is fundamentally the role of the post-capitalist party to recognize this.

Indeed, once the role of the party as revolutionary vanguard is over, it is necessary for it to deal with the interests of individual differences in a way that best serves everyone, guaranteeing that nobody can infringe on anybody else's rights. Under the Stalinist system, however, the party itself infringes on individual freedom towards realizing their needs as articulated by Maslow.

Contrary to popular belief and dogmatic espousal of Marxist doctrine, socialism can have a human face. As long as the social sciences and humanities are allowed to thrive as much as hard sciences are, as long as intellectuals are allowed to pursue their freedom of thought and individuals freedom of association... These were values as espoused by the first Socialist revolution -- The French Revolution: LIBERTY, EQUALITY, FRATERNITY.

When thinking of socialism, let us not think of Stalinism: this is the best that we can do for the victims of his reign of terror.

From wolfsilveroak and others, LJ under the new Russian Overlords is doing more censorship and there has been quite a stink about LJ's disabling of "basic accounts" without informing the userbase. "Basic accounts" basically allow one to opt out of seeing ads, because users are valuable in the way that they provide content. Users who want other perks will use ad-supported accounts and paid accounts.

...Join insanejournal. We have cookies. :D

Sorry for neglecting you guys. My internet connection is sporadic at best, and I'm not in the best of states. I'm reading through right now, and by god, there are some posts which I really relate to, but I feel sort of strange just dropping a one-liner saying "I relate to this" without adding anything else.

---

On personal things: I have been reserving this idea for quite some time, because I have yet to study in full Bukharin's ideas.

Preliminary reading of scholars' articles on Bukharin's ideas have led me to think that it is closer to my world view as it is, whether philosophically or realistically in terms of the analysis with regards to society.

When I first bought his books, I had already decided that his ideas must live on, and since it, at cursory glance, coincides with mine so well in terms of "mechanistic dialectism", I think it would not be too far off the mark to say that I am a Bukharinite. Atheistic monism (transtheism) seems to fit into Bukharin's ideas as well.

The thing is, I already was one before I read more about his works.

Reminds me of when I first talked to my prof about Bukharin... The first thing he said was, "So, you're a Bukharinite, huh?" And I was like, "Nooo..."

---

This transcript is from Getty & Naumov's primary sources. Oh, subtext.

( Dec 1936 CC Plenum transcript )

lady_alisanda, is this true?

Also note that to be truly Russian, you should leave the spoon in the mug while you drink, cake should be eaten with the teaspoons or by hand, and that dipping an already tea-wet spoon into the sugar bowl is perfectly acceptable.
-Here

Amusing sidenote regardless of whether it's true or not: I never got the hang of taking my teaspoon out of the mug, even though everyone else does it. And I always found it curious that people should eat cakes with a fork, not a teaspoon. And I'm a lazy bum, so I would do the wet-spoon-sugar-bowl-thing.

Japanese tea ceremony just makes me go "@_@" ala Kenshin-style. ;_; But I do bukhart drink a lot of green tea, because it's actually cheaply available here (from China), and is, um, green (seriously, I have no idea why I drink it so much - I substitute it for water).

Watched L: Change the World with A. today. The movie is awesome - and I'll spare you of my fannish thoughts about L. Seriously, how cute is he? The big sekkrit weapon in case of last resort is a ... gigantic bright pink Sweet Crepe Truck.

Honestly though, I love the character so much precisely because he's like the role model for us weirdos.

People like us, who walk with an eternal slouch (the scene which the young girl encouraged L to stand up straight reminds me of that time my childhood friend was like, "Don't slouch!" And I stopped slouching, only to go, "Eh, so uncomfortable" and then return to the original fetal position) - we need a role model, damnit! And what better role model than a cool guy who probably has 10 pairs of the same clothes, 0% dress sense, and permanent panda eyes? Helpless except for things that make sense in our heads, things that our brains must necessarily resolve? Seriously: it's high time that there's an awesome character that's like us.

Oh, and not to mention: no social skills. And somewhat deadpan facial expressions.

And a propensity for consumption of sweet food and cute things, y/n? :D

And - Near. I didn't expect to be happy about them not following canon, but it turned out pretty awesome. (Also, partly because I wasn't expecting Near to be a little Thai boy. The fact that he's neither white nor Japanese gives him auto-cool points, because it's not like anybody really represents south east asians in international movies.) I think the reviewers who want Death Note sequels should go circlejerk in a corner, when it's already so obvious that it's going to be about L alone.

(Actually, L was the reason I found out about Asperger's - which was before the anime came out. [I was a big fan of the manga even when I was in the States. It meant a lot to me at that time, because I ended up being betrayed and lied to by a person who was supposed to be closed to me. So, the concept of justice kept me optimistic.] Then I went to see a credible doc to prove that I actually am right, and the rest is history.)

---

I typed up some personal stuff, but decided that it was too boring and ranty and will just private it.

Speaking of which, thank you for your insight in the previous entry: I... seem to be missing a lot. It did have some special meaning to me, though, because it's my favourite historical figure ever.

I have to say, I have Asperger's Syndrome. This means that my ability to read facial expressions can be quite limited. When I read Asperger's Syndrome and Long-Term relationships, I realized that there was a lot that I was missing:

I tried looking in his face the same way he looks at mine - blank. I couldn't do it. There was too much detail, too much information in his face to not see it all. Using a mirror, I tried looking at my own face the way he sees me. I couldn't do that either. Through this exercise I gained empathy and a little sorrow for the details he may never see.

I sat down with him and told him what I saw in his face and also told him what he might see if he could see my face as others do. I told him that he'd see my big golden-green eyes widen when I'm scared and soften when I'm comfortable. He'd see sorrow, pain, and wisdom in my eyes, although I can't tell him logically why these emotions are visible. He'd see spontaneity in my mouth curving up, curving down, and constantly wiggling in-between. He'd see cheeks that are smooth and rosy, peacy from a healthy childhood. [...]

When I told him all he couldn't see, he just said, "Wow."

So, somebody on LJ left a message:

also, i really like your default icon; his
expression just evokes all sorts of emotions in me.

If you - people who don't have Asperger's - can tell me what his expression is expressing simply from the picture itself, I would be really grateful.

It is my default usericon, the one I use for this entry.

Sorry... My mental resources are shrinking right now, so I will make a general post to people whom I have stuff to say:

1) liebe_maus: Thank you for your Anti-Vday soundtrack. It is a break from what I am used to listen to, and I actually like it. (Recently, I have been expanding my music repertoire, but even gypsy music gets a bit stale.)
Also? I think Faye/Sven would be pretty good as a couple.

2) Anons of the legion: http://digg.com/educational/Dianetics_DVD_ripped_into_bittorrent
Spread it. Like wild fire. Like pictures of Britney's shaved head. Like Paris porn - You get the idea. :) Knowledge is power - know your enemy!

3) tarawriter: Thank you for everything. I don't know how I'm ever going to express my gratitude for this.

4) sour_mayonnaise: You actually have a little Detective's kit? Awesome. I sort of never actually did it, it was mostly theoretical to me. (Yes, I'm strange... ;_;)
I spent most of my time in childhood reading, writing and drawing. Apart from that, when I construct things, I don't actually derive much joy from doing them, but rather, I derive joy from constructing them in my head... And then never get around to doing them.
Yikes. I was a procrastinator since childhood!

From lady_alisanda:


Comment and I'll give you a letter; then you have to list 10 things you love beginning with that letter. Afterwards, post this in your journal and give out some letters of your own.

Letter I.

Izvestia
Not really. I don't know Russian.
Bukharin was editing this at one point, which generated a really hilarious NSFW portrait duel between him and Mezhlauk. Love by proxy.

I doubt; I think, therefore I am.
I don't exactly like Cartesian doubt (I think it's dumb), but the fundamental realization that there must be an I solves a lot of the existential Nausee that I keep feeling sometimes.
Having apodictic certainty of a certain foundation for all experience is nice.

Indian food
I never really thought seriously about going to India (my love for South Asia is limited by the temperature), but I've always loved Indian food. I also have a weak stomach, so while Americans are watching Superbowl, I'm witnessing epic Irritable Bowel Syndrome.
Most of the time, I don't even know what it's called, I just go up to the stall and point randomly at whatever looks nice. One of the benefits of living with other ethnicities who don't riot randomly.

Ivan, Hans, Tommy & Johnny
Life on the front fascinates me in a morbid way.

Isaac and Abraham
It seems to feature prominently in Kierkegaard and was mentioned once in Bukharin's letter to Stalin.
In real life, no angel will appear to stop Abraham's sword...
And if Abraham did stop, how would Isaac feel? Would he blame Abraham? Would he forgive him? Are things always so simple?

I necro you ♥
My super creepy expression of love for Bukharin: What's cute, small, intelligent, and pushin' up the daisies? Who's bereft of life and rests in peace? Who has already shuffled off his mortal coil? Whose metabolic processes are only of interest to me historians? Yes, I am aware that I am even more morbid than a mortuary. Also, watch the video if you like pretty vampiric men: Ville Valo with long hair = gorgeous.

iPod
I want one, but can't afford it. Yes, I know that it's bourgeoisie convention, but knowing that doesn't prevent me from wanting one, since I don't live in a vacuum.

Isoceles triangles
Actually, I prefer the Pythagorean triangle.
In astrology, that sort of right angled triangle doesn't seem to have a term, but I find it endlich fascinating. As for isoceles triangle in astrology, there's this thing called the "yod" (Finger of God). I have a yod with Chiron apex - it is a hard aspect, so it is no wonder that I feel like the dead parrot.

Ionesco's Rhinoceros
Had to do this for literature one day, and found it infinitely more interesting than Nabokov's Lolita. Postmodern absurdist despair makes me feel fuzzier than a creepy pedophiliac sociopath would.
I do have a bit of fondness for absurdism, even though I personally am really not of English major stock.

Inference
"You don't need proof - it's so obvious!" My prof, on David Irving and whether Hitler knew of the Holocaust.
I think this is important if one wants to understand dialectics.

For those who are interested and like their internet information in one place, I am keeping a tab on Project Chanology at LJ.

I think this has to be said: I am honestly very proud of the people who turned up, even though I played no significant part in it. The great thing about today's day and age is that people are empowered by the ability to find information so quickly and easily.

It is true that as individuals, we are no longer anonymous; we are subject to the power that the state wields, and the power that large organizations wield, but Project Chanology has proven that the masses do not need a leader. The idea of a leader, of an elite to guide people, is redundant.

Anonymous has no leader; it never had a leader... And will never need one. It is composed of people like you and me... And in this group, everybody is equally a part of something.

I'm also floored at how global it is, even though obviously the turnout depends on individual situations. There can be no doubt that this is only a small representation of what will can be in the future - a true polyglot of individuals, equal on all levels, united by no leader, no nationality - only a certain ethical conviction.

If existing organs of power are withered away systematically, then the power lies in the hands of enlightened individuals, who are then free to decide what they want to be, who they want to be, and what they will become.

People can do the right thing; justice can prevail.

Happy Lunar New Year to everyone!

Here's hoping that relatives don't make us insane by the end of tomorrow. May blessings of beer, vodka, sake, etc. shower upon us all!*



*I swear, I'm not a drunkard unless it's with extended family.

---

[edit] Just when I didn't think it is possible to be more fond of Bukharin, or have a dead person make me LOL so hard, zen_buddha@LJ wrote:

Bukharchik is formed from the verb "bukhat'" which means "to drink vodka like madman" and i seriously doubt that such nickname is more than people's fiction.

(He wrote "Dzerzhinchik" here and signed off as "Bukharchik" in one of the Lenin portraits.)

Anonymous against Scientology: Feb 10

If you live near any of these areas and dislike Scientology, I would highly encourage you to go. (I can't. Got the Pacific ocean to cross.)

Here's a youtube summary of how shady Scientology is (links included):
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E5AoBnjwdjo

Here is Anonymous' declaration against Scientology:
http://chanology.blogspot.com/2008/01/why-we-fight.html

Contrary to what Fox claims, Anonymous sees itself as a group of loosely organized individuals, composed of normal, ordinary people. Some call Anonymous the "Internet Hate Machine" (actually a term coined by the board members themselves because the board members have a kooky sense of humour). We have brought Hal Turner (at least, his site) down, discredited his antics and ridiculed his radio program. We need to do it again, this time to a larger organization that has its reach around the world.

More people need to be aware of what Scientology does, and that Scientology, as a belief system and an organized "church", actually harms people. It cheats them off their money, prevents people who have mental illnesses from receiving actual qualified help, and many well-documented cases of deaths are associated with Scientology. This is serious business, not internet tomfoolery. Actual people have been hurt, and the culprits have gotten off scot-free because they have money, a very powerful legal team, and lots of power.

The more people participate, the more the word will get out, and it is absolutely important that people are aware of the fact that it is a cult, not a religion.

Do the right thing: Join us (I will be there spiritually ;)) on Feb 10th.

School has been OK this week. I need to study for a test next week, so I'll be cutting down on Net time.

Lunar New Year is coming soon...And we're probably not going to celebrate it due to lack of cash. This bums. (On the bright side, it means I'll have time to study?)

---

I just got a book on WWI with the last vestiges of my week's dough.

I don't recall seeing people on horsebacks in WWII except in the most remote areas (damn, I need to study Total War...), so it was endlessly fascinating for me to find that WWI actually did feature men in pointy hats (heh, pointy hats) on horsebacks... With a gas mask* and that sort of thing.**


Source: JHJ Andriessen, World War I: In Photographs (If you are interested in pictures of WWI, I recommend this book. There is a nice selection of scenes - not just in action, but also in the muddy trenches, in the streets, exchanging smokes, POWs, fraternizing, casualties... It's cheap, too.)


I have to say, lighting a cigarette is now my favourite symbol of international friendship.

( More scans*** )

...I don't think I need any more commentary. I wish that people would think about this when they think of war, and I wish that they would not speak so lightly of it or make judgements out of context, that is all. :/


*Speaking of which, I'm supposed to have a gas mask arrive pretty soon. I'm sort of entertaining the idea of wearing it in school, due to the smelly nature of frat boys on crowded buses. ;)
**I'd heard about fighting on horseback in WWI and the various technological innovations... But seeing it in photography is another matter.
***I would post it to a comm if there were picture comms for these sort of things. But I figure that if anybody's interested in WWI, it's likely only a grand total of one or two of us.

---

( And two Bukharin banners. )

I've always identified as atheist, but I think with recent developments, I will admit to being trans-theistic, at least in the vein of Sankara. The reason I am a trans-theist is very simple: there is reason to be materialist within a materialistic framework, but once metaphysics is discussed, the question of ontology cannot be incorporated into a materialist framework and as such, there is no discourse available in metaphysics beyond the phenomenal in materialism. However, the question of transcendental phenomenology always lies in the fault of personalization - what is ineffable and abstract becomes personalized, either in Plato's forms or results in theism.

I am strongly antitheistic, on the basis that all religion create more division than unity; more destruction than compensation. As such, I cannot in good conscience not oppose theistic religions of any shape or form. The vilest, in my opinion, is monotheistic.

I have been waiting to learn this in philosophy for all my life. Finally, I have found a label that fits me thoroughly, instead of latching on to unsuitable, ill-fitting ones that barely describe my stand on metaphysics and theology.

I don't have better pictures because I can't afford the batteries to put into my usual camera.

As for the bottom, I want to paint tree silhouettes in, but I don't have the skills and brush control to do it, so I'm leaving it as is (for now?).






( Details of the top 3. )