Ben Myers’ “Canon Fodder”

Here is the link:

He calls it “the shortest commentary on the whole Bible.”

Jon Adams linked to this here at CedarsEleven on the “Quick Comments” page.  (Thanks, Jon.)  But some may not notice it there, and it deserves a post of its own, so here it is.

Comments, as always, are most welcome.

Bloody Sunday Revisited

Counterpunch has just posted this article:

This refers to an incident from over 40 years ago that may be broadly referred to as part of “the Troubles” among the British and the Irish.  Apparently there has been a completion of a (long-delayed, in my opinion) “official investigation.”  Long story short, whatever bad stuff happened, it was caused by the usual few “rotten apples” at the bottom of the barrel.  You can imagine the rest; in fact, you will have to imagine the rest, since the investigative vigor of the official investigation is inversely proportional to the official rank of the officials being investigated.  If I make myself, like Richard Nixon, perfectly clear.

Well, I for one am glad that “the Troubles” seem to be mostly over and settled, and I do not wish to reopen what appears to have been a can of worms; and it seems that most other folks feel much the same way.  So why am I bringing this up?

To raise a question that is interesting to historians, writers, and readers:  what is the importance that we attach to documents and documentation.  Why do people sometimes destroy documents that would compromise them, and sometimes they retain them, and even insist that they be archived — though only behind impenetrable walls of secrecy?

Why do living relatives insist on their dead being “officially” exonerated or pardoned, given that they are dead and gone forty years?  (I’m not saying they shouldn’t; I think they should.  Just asking why: why is this important . . . “for the record”?)

For me at least, this raises questions and curiosities about the whole of history and of human consciousness — in what modes are things conceived, done, remembered, forgotten, etc.?

And perhaps the “etc.” is the most interesting part.  Your thoughts are most welcome.


Pete Seeger 1919-2014

John Whitehead of the Rutherford Institute has written a nice tribute to Pete Seeger, the old anti-war, pro-civil-rights folk singer who just passed.

When I first heard of Pete Seeger back in the 60s, I just thought he was a commie. Fortunately for me, my attitude changed.

He wrote a bunch of great songs. Here is one, on Youtube.

Support The Troops: Monsanto Poisons At Fort McClellan

They had to pay damages for poisoning civilians.

But not for poisoning military personnel.

Chaos Has Never Been Closer: “Obama May Suspend Election” If Hillary Clinton Is Too Sick

What The Hell Is Praxeology?

This is the title of a website’s homepage. Here:

I am linking to it here, because:

1. It has many links to articles about the thinking of the “Austrian School” of economics that included Ludwig von Mises, F. A. Hayek, and Murray Rothbard.

2. These gentlemen, in turn, have influenced

a. libertarians in America and around the world

b. the Lew Rockwell people who center around Auburn University

c. the Ron Paul campaigns

3. it stands in sharp contrast to

a. the old left

b. the new left

c. fascism

d. neo-conservatism

I am NOT linking to it because I think that it is something that I particularly agree with; nor that it is either “Christian” or “Judeo-Christian”– but simply, something to be investigated.

In fact, “praxeology” is a word that was coined by von Mises to describe (in as clear terms as possible) the study of “human action.”