Aside

In the past, when a conservative faction like the one “led” by George W. Bush behaved too aggressively outright, the “antidote” was for a “softer” liberal faction to come into power, gain popularity and give the false impression that they have made things right again only by padding all the brutality with lip-service to humanitarianism.  This is the way it was in India during British occupation.  However, nearing the end of Britain’s rule in India, we also began seeing problems that false-liberalism couldn’t fix.

Right now, Obama and the liberals are showing us they may be the more aggressive and less honest faction in reality.  The current conservatives aren’t going to be any “softer.”

Again, it’ll be interesting to see what transpires from here on out.

(Amy Chua had no problem expounding on this conservative-liberal pendulum-swing that accompanies the demise of a hegemon in her book “Day of Empire.” Ironically (and perhaps not so ironically,) Chua herself is archetypal of this type of fake-liberalism and intellectualism.  She only discussed this scenario in relation to British India and made absolutely no mention of any US imperialistic crimes in the same book.  How will she discuss this problem for contemporary Western society when she is a part of the problem herself?

See: The Daily Servant of Power: Amy Chua)

Nobel Prize for Noam Chomsky

Standard

Why is it that those who contribute to nothing but war, terrorism, and bloodshed get Nobel Peace Prizes, but a true dissident like Noam Chomsky, who has proven time and time again that he is one of the only honest intellectuals (amongst the big-name intellectuals that is) left, goes unnoticed and unrecognized?

Yes, part of being a true dissident is that you do it despite the recognition, and sometimes in the face of more sinister forms of recognition, but I think that now is the time to right previous wrongs.  It’s pretty clear now who has been contributing to terror and who has been opposing it.


The Nobel Peace Prize committee has pretty much been pandering to the very vapid and unenlightened Western liberal mindset that wants to pretend that the West is genuinely level-headed and, thus, needs to act as the global policeman.  This is why they gave the prize to Barack Obama and Liu Xiaobo, in my opinion.

It’s a type of Western liberal PR tactic.


People who have contributed to nothing but war, violence and bloodshed:

Number of Nobel Peace Prizes shared amongst them: 3


Those who stood up against Western and Israeli terror while all other intellectuals were whitewashing the crimes:

Number of Nobel Peace Prizes shared amongst them: 0