I’m working hard to put aside my ingrained Southern Baptist upbringing to embrace a new faith, a new belief system and way of looking at the world.
I’m talking, of course, about embracing the Force… you know, like from Star Wars.
Now, hold on, hear me out. In the Star Wars films, which I started enjoying at the prime age of 10 with the first one released, we are told that the Force is kind of an energy field that permeates the entire universe; it flows within us and between us, binding all living and nonliving matter together into a cohesive whole.
Now, if we were to put a more human face on this concept, it would resemble nothing so much as… gee, Davey… well, our traditional notion of God.
We are told that God, whatever He or It is, is manifest in all things: that nothing within the material or ethereal multiverse exists outside His influence. Nevertheless, we tend to cast God in our own image, more or less. He resembles a human – usually an elderly man, full of gravitas, who’s still fairly handsome in his later years, like that World’s Most Interesting Man from the beer commercials. In other words, we tend to personify God, to think of Him as a conscious being, much as we ourselves are.
Therein lies a conundrum. On the one hand, we think of God as all-knowing, all-seeing, a thousand times more wise than ourselves, and a million times more knowledgeable. We’re told that He has a plan, and for our small part, we somehow fit into that plan. But oftentimes His plan may seem a bit cruel to us: a natural disaster, war, the death of a loved one or child, can shake our faith in His intentions. How could a God, the God who so loves us (we are constantly told), allow such horrible things to happen? If the death of a child is part of His plan, then shouldn’t we say to Hell with that plan, as we would that of any mortal leader?
Perhaps, then, our problem lies in thinking of God as a conscious being like ourselves in the first place. Now, this goes against hundreds, perhaps thousands of years of worldwide traditional religious thinking, although to be fair humanity’s gods have already taken innumerable shapes and visages. But maybe that belief isn’t quite accurate – after all, we don’t know the true nature of God and are only surmising as best as our human intellects can reckon.
What if we think of God a different way – not as a sentient being with thoughts and consciousness, but more as a free-floating aspect of the universe itself, an energy field (the Zero Point Energy? Quantum weirdness?) that permeates everything, even the supposed vacuum separating worlds? Maybe it has some sort of Will or vast Cosmic Consciousness, but not in the traditional way we usually think of.
Whenever something bad happens, traditional Christians will tend to shrug and proclaim it as ‘God’s Will,’ which means they don’t understand or necessarily approve of it, but reckon that God has a bigger purpose in mind and this current calamity is simply part of His plan – we just don’t have his grand view of the larger scheme.
With the Force, such a concept becomes more rational. We can see unfortunate events as happening not because of some Supreme Being’s whim, but instead as the result of a vast number of forces, many of them unseen or even immeasurable, ebbing and flowing to produce the chaos that is our reality. If that’s the case, then we can more dispassionately observe calamitous events: Could you lose faith in gravity? Would you swear vengeance against magnetism? If the universe is run not by conscious control but by inevitable forces eternally mixing and playing against one another, such questions become meaningless.
Of course, such a belief system opens up innumerable cans of worms. In such a system, do we truly have Free Will? Can the Force bend somewhat to our will, as the Jedi Knights of the films are able to cause? Is the Force a thing to be worshipped, or is it basically just window dressing for atheism? Is there room for such a thing as morality?
As to that last question, much is made in the films of the so-called Dark Side of the Force, which bad guys use to become very powerful. It’s fed by hate, lust, desire for power, all of the notions that are traditionally seen as being negative. If the Force truly exists, would such a negative aspect exist also – the Force soured, perhaps coagulated or stagnant, which seeps into human activities just as much as its counterpart? After all, it’s difficult to think of such a concept without also embracing its polar opposite: One can hardly have Yin without Yang, a cat without a fine rat, protons without electrons, etc. In our grasp for meaning, such a duality strikes us as being ‘fair,’ an explanation for why so much misery and corruption tend to exist in our perceived reality.
I’ll be the first to admit, I don’t have answers to any of these questions. I might be barking up the wrong Yggdrasil and committing the worst sort of heresy. But personally, I think it makes as much sense as any other belief system. After all, none of us knows for certain, and we’ve precious little evidence one way or another.
How does this tie into libertarianism? Well, for me, it has to do with traditional religion and faith. I’ve always had a problem with the idea of ‘worshipping’ someone, or something. To prostrate oneself before a person, or a concept, to declare “I’m nothing and you’re everything,” strikes me as particularly unhealthy. Maybe I’m a heretic for even pondering this, but I think such a surrendering of the will is one of the worst practices mankind has ever performed and a huge part of why the world is the way it is.
Maybe it’s my youthful reading of Heinlein coming out, but I believe the value of human beings lies primarily in our ferociousness, our tenacity, our will to survive and to thrive: not to bow to those who would demand our fealty, but to spit in their eye. There’s a reason why humans have conquered this world and molded it to suit us, and it’s not just because of our intelligence: it’s because that’s the way we wanted it, and we weren’t going to stop until either reality folded, or we did.
Belief in the Force, then, is a religion which suits my nonconformist self to a T. I don’t have to pay a tithe, I don’t have to give deference to a priestly caste. Heck, I can sleep in as late as I want on Sunday morning. I can make up my own goofy rituals if I want to.
I’m not here to try to make any converts; I just wanted to put the concept out there and see what varieties of tomatoes you mugs can throw at it. Maybe I’m just a loon for coming up with the idea in the first place.
But in any case… hey, you knew this was coming: may the Force be with you all.
Or not.
Whatevs.
P.S. – Midichlorians are a bunch of hooey.
Something Built the Place, God works fine, Entity or Concept
Use the Shwartz!
Good article!
Thanks!
Nerd Deism. But what about the Midichlorians? What’s your count?
I lost my abacus.
Your new religion apparently doesn’t believe in alt-text.
Only fascists use alt-text.
NAZI
Meh, I left the images to whichever editor posted the article.
Probably Riven. She was gonna add alt-text, but then she got high.
Story of my life, Old Man.
Alt-text for Yoda:
He does look a little bit like George Burns
Alt-text for the Emperor:
Fair? Life ain’t fair!
“Nevertheless, we tend to cast God in our own image, more or less. He resembles a human – usually an elderly man, full of gravitas, who’s still fairly handsome in his later years, like that World’s Most Interesting Man from the beer commercials. In other words, we tend to personify God, to think of Him as a conscious being, much as we ourselves are.”
Jewish conceptions of G-d are fairly close to the Force except (((G-d))) is in fact a conscious being, however He is incorporeal and unknowable, much like the Force.
“In general, Judaism views the existence of G-d as a necessary prerequisite for the existence of the universe. The existence of the universe is sufficient proof of the existence of G-d[…]Although many places in scripture and Talmud speak of various parts of G-d’s body (the Hand of G-d, G-d’s wings, etc.) or speak of G-d in anthropomorphic terms (G-d walking in the garden of Eden, G-d laying tefillin, etc.), Judaism firmly maintains that G-d has no body. Any reference to G-d’s body is simply a figure of speech, a means of making G-d’s actions more comprehensible to beings living in a material world[…]This follows directly from the fact that G-d has no physical form. As one rabbi explained it to me, G-d has no body, no genitalia, therefore the very idea that G-d is male or female is patently absurd. We refer to G-d using masculine terms simply for convenience’s sake, because Hebrew has no neutral gender; G-d is no more male than a table is[…]G-d transcends time. He has no beginning and no end. He will always be there.”
From: http://www.jewfaq.org/g-d.htm (which is an awesome (((site))) BTW)
Oh, representing (((Him))), or really even thinking of (((Him))), in a physical form is idolatry, an action with one of the strictest possible prohibitions.
jewfaq.org
He dropped a hard J! You can’t say things like that!
How about this?
jewfag.org
All their (((shit))) is retarded too.
Well, he wrestled with Jacob, did several finger things, and showed Moses his ass. I’m going for “corporeal.”
and showed Moses his ass.
I thought she showed him her red pubes?
He also refers to himself as plural…
Let us make man in our image…
I’ve read some interesting (and unpersuasive) rationalizations from Jewish scholars about this. Some say he’s talking about “God and all the angels doing it together”, or other similarly unpersuasive variations. The motivation for this is the Christian insistence that this plurality is early evidence for the Trinity, which is something that a Rabbi would obviously take issue with.
I had occasion to follow that thread a few months back and found a half-dozen Rabbi bloggers who had the same explanation – that God refers to himself as singular many other times, including just a few sentences later. And they all had a similar misconception – that the Christian Holy Trinity is about 3 different Gods. So they felt this must be refuted by explaining that there is only one God.
I was quite surprised that several different Jewish academics and Rabbis would not understand that Christianity is a monotheistic religion and the Trinity is an understanding of a single God with three distinct “manifestations”, for want of a term. It is weird – but you have to take a theology at face value to evaluate it.
“Let us make man in our image”
I’ve always interpreted this as “make man’s mind with the spark of divine creation within”. Since, at least in my interpretation, in Genesis the thought of G-d is what instantiates the Universe. Since we still don’t have any clue what the motive force for ideas in the human mind is, we may as well claim they are ex nihilo. The answer may someday be discovered, but it’s unavailable now.
Yeah, that seems to be the common take.
But the interesting thing is the plural reference. Let “us” make him in “our” image.
Folks debate whether that means that there are other Gods that He was asking to help him. Or maybe it is a royal “we”. Or emblematic of the Trinity. Or talking about Angels and Demons. Or just a figure of speech.
Who knows… but it definitely stands out. Most references are singular -” I am that I am” kind of stands out. But he also says “behold, man is become one of us” in Genesis. “Let us go down there and confound their language” but “I have created earth and man on it”
I dunno if it means anything… but Christians take it as evidence for the Trinity.
I’ve not heard that take in 40 years of attending church. I’ve always understood it to be the “royal we”.
They didn’t use the royal we back then. That comes along a couple of thousand years later. It is plural in the Hebrew.
I thought Progressiveness (Progression?) was the new faith?
Who knows how it bodes for the long-term success of classical liberalism, but it’s so much more comforting to contextualize politics in terms of trade-offs, not silver bullets, and to understand that no politician is a satisfactory avatar of one’s preferred political outcomes. It’s liberating to realize that many elections will be disappointing, but none apocalyptic. To divest oneself of the day-to-day frustrations of politics, and to recognize that, as engrossed as we sometimes find ourselves with that dismal world, we do not live there. We live in the reality of our families and careers and communities and faiths. Do the two overlay and interact? Well, yes. It’s our burden to live with the consequences of the former on the latter. But the one is illusory and indirect and marginal, while the other defines us to our cores. Progressives who obsess over how their political identities define themselves have it woefully, awfully backward. The sort of people who pen and consume missives on how to deal with politics over Thanksgiving are sad and pathetic and deserve our pity, and a little contempt. They trivialize their identities to conform to their politics rather than merely tolerating the latter to inform the former. Angry, stupid, and cruel is no way to go through life.
So beer, guns, porn and thin crust pizza then?
“thin crust pizza”
BURN THE HERETIC!
That’s not a pizza, that’s a cracker with sauce and cheese
Mmmm… pizza crackers.
Goddamn delicious cardboard pizza.
You know, everyone talks about New York pizza, Chicago Pizza and such. But I bet the majority of Americans know pizza mostly from frozen pizza, which means Wisconsin and Minnesota style pizza are probably the most well known. Jack’s Pizza and Tombstone Pizza are from Wisconsin, and Red Baron is from Minnesota.
“I’ll take Inedible Substances for $100, Alex.”
Jack’s Pizza and Tombstone Pizza, and Red Baron
“What are three grocery store items that are embarrassing travesties of the finest food substance on earth?”
You’re right. Heggie’s is the best.
I read that as transvestites at first.
I think the news cycle is getting to me.
Red Baron pizza is pretty good for $5. It’s not gourmet stuff, but one of them will feed me twice and there’s barely anything to clean up afterwards. Bachelor Chow!
Red Baron pizza is pretty good for $5
Says the guy who subsists on cigarettes and Bud Light.
You misspelled Lagunitas.
Dude, I’ve been in your refrigerator. And in Playa’s.
Yours: Bud Lite.
Playa’s: Sculpin Pineapple.
It’s true. There is Bud Light in my fridge. In fact, the same cans you saw then are still there now. Even my teammates who buy the stuff don’t want to drink it.
Cool story, bro.
Supreme only.
Red Baron is an affront to humanity.
A delicious affront to humanity.
Note: Red Baron is the upgrade of Tony’s pizza.
What about Beach Pizza?
Damnit, forgot the link
https://munchies.vice.com/en_us/article/pgxzm8/the-pizza-rivalry-thats-keeping-a-dying-beach-community-afloat
Brew Pub – Lotzza Motzza has become the family favorite at the Chip’s household.
Yum (Pizza Hut) and Papa Johns are both Louisville based.
So maybe that is the true center of pizzadom.
What’s the word for when the provided example proves the opposite of the claim?
pwnd
We are measuring by volume, right?
to be fair, as a child, i considered Elios (those square pieces you throw in toaster oven) “pizza” to be the sound core-basis of any person’s basic diet.
I consumed Elios on a daily basis, after school, for quite a while.
“thin crust pizza then?”
There is only “pizza” and the un-pizza (deep dish).
Be the ball, Danny.
Nununununununun
G’Kar said it better
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JjnpTcvGvts
Serious question –
Were Han Solo and Lando Calrissian the only libertarian characters in the series? Seems like they were the least interested in taking part in Rebels vs Empire, and were mostly just regular working guys …. minus the exotic sidekicks and tricked our spacecraft.
Luke’s Uncle? No fucks to give except for his farm.
True. Too bad he didn’t have more and better blasters when the Imperials showed up.
He had just ordered some new ones from Indiana but they hadn’t arrived yet.
Are seriously suggesting that Mos Eisely is as bad as South Chicago?
THE NERVE
What is Chewy, chopped Gwarrrraaaaaaaaah?
‘Exotic sidekick’
It’s implied that he shared Han’s lack of politic.
Maybe you can translate that to Kashyyki?
Have you seen Solo yet? The sidekicks get more exotic.
Think Robosexual.
Have yet to see it. 4 week old baby at home, no date nights for me.
Do what everyone else does and bring your newborn to the most crowded showing possible.
/fumes silently, waits for Amazon stream
There’s a small arty cinema here in Ithaca (college town, of course there is) and on Thursday afternoons they have a ‘bring your little ones to the theatre’ day. It’s understood that shit is going to be loud, and it’s a chance for parents of young kids to go to the movies. But because it’s an artsy fartsy theatre, they’re not carrying Solo.
He is wearing a wookie suit after all.
Chewbacca. And all those bounty hunters.
Who shot first, goddammit.
Han shot first.
Greedo uttered legitimate threats against Han’s safety.
#standyourground
I know, guys. Just yanking chains. I actually bought a box set of the first three movies on DVD, and when I saw that shit, I sold them immediately, without even watching what had been done to Empire Strikes Back or Return of the Jedi.
I consider the bounty hunters to be corporatists, only too happy to work for the Empire’s largesse.
In other words, they get No True Scotsman’d out of the club.
And what about the Hutt’s?
We never once see Jabba violate the NAP. He sends bounty hunters after Han because Han owes him money, he imprisons Lea after she attempts to steal from him, and drops Luke into the Rancor cell in self defense. He also clearly does not believe in restrictive tariffs and is pro open borders (hence hiring smugglers), has no love for the Empire, and is pro gambling.
I mean other than allowing Slavery on Tattooine, which we don’t know that Jabba had anything to do with, it could easily have been a pre-existing cultural norm resulting from the relative poverty of a distant frontier world with a very poor climate he ran the place as pretty much an An Cap paradise.
He does throw that sex slave chick with the two long head thingies into his monster den, purely for the lulz. That’s not very NAP.
But otherwise, great analysis.
She’s a different species…. it was like you tossing a piglet in with the dogs.
Rude… inhumane even. But not a violation of the NAP since she’s not a Hutt.
#HuttRights uber alles.
Violation of contract. The No Getting Grossed Out clause was clearly initialed.
Han also paid the bartender and apologized for the mess.
Having Steve Spielberg as your Prophet seems ….belittling.
Imma stick with “Love God, love your neighbor”
I thought there was a commandment against loving your neighbor?
That’s your neighbors ass.
And having STEVE SMITH as your prophet seems…painful.
I think you mean George Lucas.
Him too.
Having Steve Spielberg as your Prophet seems ….belittling.
I know, right? What kind of crazy-ass religion would deify a Jew?
*crucifies gaze*
golf clap
10 replies in and nobody said it yet? Okay.
NEEEEEEEERRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRD!
I’m your huckleberry. Wait, wrong film.
Don’t get me wrong I find this vastly superior to the Adventures of the Space Communists. (Star Trek)
Back in the day, some of my dumbass ‘friends’ on FB would Post a retarded meme that showed ‘Star Trek’ as ‘Socialist Future’ and ‘Mad Max’ as Libertarian Future.
I took great delight in pointing out that it was collectivist government overreach which brought the nuclear holocaust on which Mad Max is premised, and that Star Trek would have never had the wealth to build out the Federations’s Fleet without capitalism or trade.
“Star Trek would have never had the wealth to build out the Federations’ Fleet without capitalism or trade”
True. Also, Star Trek is premised on some kind of “post-scarcity” technology that, presumably, was invented by capitalist shitlords who were looking for evil profit.
However, the fact that Star Trek’s universe has essentially unlimited resources and perpetual motion machines does at least make their socialistic vision (sort of) possible as opposed to the utopians here on Planet Earth.
And then there’s the somewhat contradictory story lines of the Ferengi and other ruthless capitalists.
If the Federation is so benevolent, post scarcity and non-capitalist, why are there so many capitalists?
Hmm. Something which occurred to me, although it may be entirely insignificant, is that the principal “capitalist” shown positively, Quark, is a merchant and service provider rather than a capitalist in the Marxist sense (i.e., owner of the means of production). Ezri Dax’s family, who owned a mine, were portrayed a lot less sympathetically, although the business aspects were downplayed. Then again, replicator technology and nearly limitless energy basically makes anyone capable of owning the means of production.
Yeah, I found the introduction of strips of latinum kind of confusing. In a world with unlimited energy and replicators, how could anything hold value? They tried to back-fill that with limitations on replicator technology… but they also beamed the stuff around. And if you can transport it, you can replicate it.
I found it a forgivable hole and willingly suspended disbelief.
Not using transporter technology as a weapon in battle was less forgivable.
Other than going crazy-deep into transporter consequences (e.g. Two Rikers), how would you use it as weapn? Asfar as I remember, they are used to board ships, and yes, you could beam a warhead onto a ship – but since that means shields are down, you may as well just shoot it to bits instead of bringing in live warhead onto transported pad inside your own ship and hope there’s no 1-in-a-million glitch. Plus, you’d have to bring your own shields down to do it.
see the assassin episode on DS9. They take a while to figure out who/where the killer is because he is transporting his shot.
The thing about Latinum was that it couldn’t be replicated, so it had that going for it when it comes to value.
Though when every physical need, and most of the wants you could ever imagine are available to you at your leisure, it doesn’t really make acquisition of a store of value worth the effort. About the only need you cannot replicate your way to satisfy is relationships (however much Barclay tried)
One of the things I liked about DS9 is we got to see a bit of how ‘Civilians’ lived on Earth.
Those earth scenes to me say that ‘money’ or ‘credits’ or exchange of something of value based on things you have/do still exists in United Earth.
Take Sisko’s dad. He ran a diner in New Orleans, or the Picard Vinyard
I suppose you could argue that Sisko doesn’t actually charge people to eat there, and that he runs it as a labor of love, but he had to get the diner from somewhere, which suggests that he provided labor or some other thing of value to acquire it from someone else.
The Picard Vinyard seems to have been an inheritance, but there is still how the wine gets distributed as it is a scare good as well.
Housing is also scarce, with the scarcity being the location (ie beach houses being super prime locations). A political means of deciding who gets to live where does not really seem like it would exist under “United Earth” principles, so there has to be some means of determining who lives where, and exchange of valuable goods/labor seems the most likely.
It’s simple. Party Members (aka Star Fleet officers) get first pick, then down through the ranks to the proles.
On using transporters as weapons….
Shooting photon torpedoes is often depicted with evasive maneuvers. Transport the same weapon to the enemy instead. No evading that.
When you get a gap in the shields, or other method of temporarily penetrating shields, transport a large explosive like a photon torpedo instead of an assault team. Or transport their warp core out.
Since a transporter is also essentially a replicator, you can just replicate and transport all sorts of weapons. “Target their weapons” is a common refrain. If you can transport into a room, you should be able to park a shaped charge right outside the reactor port or weapons bay, or sensor array….
It is a pretty powerful weapon. Much more powerful than anything else they have. And they have the severe limitation of not being able to transport when the shields are up…. so just have a weapons drone that pops outside the shield and transports weapons then pops back in.
Or maybe transport a quarter pound of anti-hydrogen directly in the path of the warp nacels. Even with shields, that should vaporize a good chunk of the enemy ship.
Some problems with transporters as weapons.
Transporters are easily disrupted, even by something as simple as a planet’s atmosphere. Starships may have dampeners installed in and around sensitive areas to minimize this potential even when defensive shields are not enabled. Strangely they don’t seem to put them on Starship bridges or they just aren’t enabled until combat has begun.
Transporter systems are routinely disabled by combat
You need to be much closer to the enemy to use a transporter than you do photons/phasers.
Besides, do you really want to be in range of a core breach on a damaged enemy ship. (observation: there ought to be a lot more core breaches any time a ship is catastrophically damaged by combat)
On TV it tends to look like combat is conducted within visual range, but that is of course a fiction just to make TV more interesting…fire at that tiny dot 150,000 km away is not good TV.
Ship to ship transport is a little tricky when the two ships are not moving at the same speed relative to each other…highly likely in a combat scenario.
Transporters cannot (easily) be used ship to ship at warp, while photons can
By Voyager the story writers had solved the problem of (easily) transporting through your own shields, but they still hadn’t figured out how to (easily) transport through an enemy’s shields.
invented by capitalist shitlords who were looking for evil profit
I dunno. Back on Kirk’s ship, they only had “protein resequencers”, which were capable of outputting a variety of foodstuffs, but the implication seemed pretty clear that it required material feedstock(s) to operate. Replicators weren’t invented until sometime between the two eras. Perhaps the federation acquired that tech from the ferengi or another free-trading civilization, otherwise it was invented by some collectivist asshole.
Replicators still clearly require energy, which they’re provided with via dilithium moderated matter/antimatter annihilation, the scarcity of which is demonstrated by repeated conflicts surrounding dilithium mining/trade.
So they can’t even post-scarcity-utopia properly.
Trekkies eat their own poop?
I think where The Force goes sideways is that it eschews all strong emotion. It isn’t just Fear, Anger and Hate that are of the dark side (and I’d make the argument that -at least- 2 of those three aren’t inherently negative), but that any passion is of the dark side. The Force, or at least, as promoted by the Jedi also rejects rationality. (Let go your conscious mind.) The core philosophy seems to be about taking your sensory input and then allowing the Force to control you like some meat puppet. Also, any religion that posits the kidnapping of young children to be taken far away, raised in a temple by unmarried weirdos and indoctrinated into their self-abnegating cult has to be evil. You can’t tell me that the Jedi Temple wasn’t rife with pedo Jedi Masters and Knights violating those big-eyed younglings like some kind of weird galactic sex buffet.
Lucas ain’t the sharpest light saber in the shed. If it’s logical consistency you’re looking for, you’re not going to find it.
Oh, Lucas is about as bright as the inside of a Sarlacc, so yeah. I don’t think it rises to even coherence, let alone logical consistency.
Look, he wrote the screenplay in just 12 parsecs….
I don’t think it rises to even coherence, let alone logical consistency.
Not a barrier to religion, I don’t think.
It’s a necessity. If the shit made sense you wouldn’t need a guild of holy men employed to explain it all to the common folk. Religion is a make-work program for con-artists.
“galactic sex buffet”
Dibs on the band name.
Would you like to learn the ways of the Schwartz?
I see your Schwartz is as big as mine
Just what I needed, a {{{Druish Princess}}}.
Kneel before Zardoz you hapless brutals! Have you forgotten already the gift of the gun? Prepare to feel his wrath!
I think where The Force goes sideways is that it eschews all strong emotion.
Emotion clouds the mind.
Emotion /can/ cloud the mind. If you allow it to run roughshod over your rational mind. But a life without joy or love or sorrow, without any sort of passion would be dull and not much worth living
Maybe worth living, maybe not.
But “emotion” is just the word we use for “instinctive cognition”. This is by definition irrational thought – anathema to the concept of “mind” as a rational actor.
So instinctive behaviors like mating, eating, nesting, protecting the young, etc. are all driven by emotional processes that arise from somewhere other than the conscious mind.
I think you create a false dichotomy. Are emotions irrational? Sure. But they are important indicators that some part of your instinctive or primitive drives are being activated and they need attention. It may simply be to tamp them down. But those emotions sometimes have important things to say. I don’t think your rational mind is necessarily in opposition to emotion. In fact, I’d argue humans work best when their emotions are bridled by their rational intellect. And the Jedi reject both, which makes them inhuman to me.
Oh sure. To be human is to be an animal… a mammal that has instincts driving its behaviors… at least as much as it is to be a rational being. Most folks would reject that prospect, thinking of themselves as rational actors.
Having a pregnant wife in your house will disabuse you of that notion.
As will anything that alters hormone levels. I have a friend who lost her libido entirely in her mid-30’s. She’s a vastly different person now. She used to be something of a party girl and enjoyed making sexually charged jokes. Now she finds all of that not only uninteresting, but somewhat gross. As her libido left, so did her ability to understand everything that goes with it. It was very revealing of just how much “who we are” is shaped by things like hormonal fluctuations. It also changed her marriage beyond the obvious. She didn’t have any interest in her husband any more… beyond just not wanting sex. Without that attraction she didn’t really give a crap what he thought about anything any more. So the relationship completely dissolved… not because he wasn’t patient about the lack of intimacy, but because she became completely indifferent to him as a person.
Really odd, having known them for over a decade before those changes started. If anything she became closer to the “intellectual” creature of the mind. And it wasn’t a change for the better – even if most outside people couldn’t tell the difference.
Did this friend ever get checked out by a doctor? Sounds like something went wrong.
Yeah… she ended up with full hysterectomy. Elected against hormone replacement. Not sure, but I don’t think she even plays with her own bits. At least she’s made references along those lines a couple of times. Doesn’t date. Not interested. And not worried about the libido because she’s happy without it. Didn’t care a whit about losing her marriage – other than the inconvenience – and doesn’t really have any interest at all in having those sorts of feelings.
Not interested in the same way that you might not be interested in Russian Poetry read in the native Russian. Don’t like poetry. Don’t speak Russian. Don’t like spoken word performances. Not interested in learning more about it. So you aren’t going to go talk with someone about kindling your interest.
It is only *really* strange because I knew her before and she was quite sexual. If you didn’t have a context, she’d just be an aging woman who is really into her own thing and has given up on dating. But knowing that she used to enjoy a little innocent flirting and liked to feel attractive, it is weird seeing her absolutely disinterested in everything about it.
I have no idea and I’m talking out of my ass, but losing your libido is one thing; not caring about your marriage falling apart (independent of the sexual aspects) is something else entirely.
Almost sounds like a psychiatric problem.
I agree.
But one definitely seemed to follow the other. They were a pretty tight couple. Then she lost all attraction (to him and every other guy). And then she just didn’t find him all that interesting any more. And then it just died.
He worked pretty hard at trying to keep it together. But it really didn’t seem to reach her at all. I guess without that instinctual connection, there just wasn’t a drive to keep a guy around.
So as far as “psychological problem” goes, I’d say that changing hormone levels influencing instinctive behaviors is indistinguishable from psychological problems.
That was one of the hardest things for me to grasp as I grew up in my 20s; that I wasn’t as rational as I thought, and nobody else is all that rational either. The animal urges motivate us way more than we know.
And your description of your friend’s marriage doesn’t surprise me. There are all sorts of things that cause the body to soak the brain in various hormones and those then drive behavior. Everything from the anger from being hungry to the way exercise can create arousal.
My wife should just go ahead and get a “I’m sorry for what I said when I was hungry” tattoo. It’d save time.
STEVE SMITH IS STEVE SMITH
Can they leave the name blank too?
https://hotair.com/archives/2018/06/04/victory-nyc-adding-x-gender-birth-certificates/
How about species?
Can I identify as a minotaur?
Is the strength and constitution bonus really worth the intelligence and charisma penalty?
But a life without joy or love or sorrow, without any sort of passion would be dull and not much worth living
Unquestionably true. I was thinking about action/combat situations.
wchipperdove, you were never in the Marine Corps were you?
I was stationed with a guy who claimed the force as his religion.
He got pissed when one of his roommates was watching the “Making of” DVD with him, as Lucas started on the Force and where the ideas came from the roommate said”See, right there, IT’S FAKE!”
As to that last question, much is made in the films of the so-called Dark Side of the Force, which bad guys use to become very powerful. It’s fed by hate, lust, desire for power, all of the notions that are traditionally seen as being negative.
Well, given that the Star Wars movies were essentially Jedi propaganda, sure. Of course, if you really pay attention, you realize the Jedi were just as evil as the Sith. I mean, you don’t get to call yourself the good guys if you’re lying to some teenage kid by telling him that his actual dad was “the guy who killed your dad”. They purposely set out to deceive the kid into committing patricide. And nevermind the entire business of not telling that same kid the girl he was trying to bed was actually his sister. Even in the prequels, Anakin insists Palpataine is entitled to a fair trial (in accordance to what the Jedi claim is their doctrine). And the Jedi leader decides, no it’s better to play judge, jury and executioner. Basically, the Jedi were a corrupt religious-military order seeking to control the Republic from behind the scenes. The Sith were simply more explicit in their evil.
If you’re an authoritarian and you make up a fictional universe, of course you’re going to have two factions warring for control of everything. It’s never going to be one authoritarian side and one “just leave us all alone” side.
As I said above, the just leave us alone side was the Hutts
Bwahahahah, I could actually see this happening
https://worldnewsdailyreport.com/white-man-asked-black-friend-to-impregnate-his-wife-to-fight-white-privilege/
Poe’s Law.
Wait isn’t this material available on any pron site? Asking for a friend.
I am reasonably certain that there are a number of sites dedicated to just this sort of activity, not sure if any of them have incorporated social justice themes into them yet however
Rule 34.
I don’t throw around the “cuck” label, but damn.
Well it is not real but I gotta say I would be shocked if something very much like this has not already happened in Portland
Dammit. I think I’ve lost the ability to discern reality from satire with the far left.
Where would they find a black guy in Portland?
East of I-405 and a couple places in NE.
I met a black family from Portland – when they moved to the Houston area. Apparently there was quite a bit of racist attitude up there. Shocking, I know.
I’ve grown to hate Star Wars. And the man (men?) children who still discuss them like the nerds they are.
btw, is anyone up for some board gaming?
I’ve got Lords of Waterdeep, Ascension, Dominion, Settlers of Catan, and Pandemic on my phone if anyone is looking for an online game 🙂
I know, right? Damn nerds.
*goes back to reading pulp sci-fi*
Relevant.
Frigging nerds. Why can’t they get into stuff enjoyed by real men?
Don’t try to frighten us with your sorcerer’s ways. Your sad devotion to that ancient religion has not helped you conjure up the stolen data tapes, or given you clairvoyance enough to find the rebels’ hidden base.
I find your lack of faith disturbing?
Why do people keep calling it an ancient religion and acting like it is something from hundreds of years ago?
There were actual Jedi cruising around the galaxy less than 40 years earlier, it is not like the ancient past and reliable firsthand accounts of people still alive would easily attest to the reality of their magical abilities
And an Emperor who’s capable of shooting frigging lightning out of his fingers. I’d kind of think that would be a dead giveaway.
The only ones who know about the lightning were Jedi or dead.
There are kids today who were born just after the Berlin Wall fell and are completely convinced Communism works.
Yes but that is different from believing the Soviet Union never existed
Describing it as an ancient religion is intentionally derogatory, and also accurate. Just like calling Christianity an ancient religion would be accurate.
18 years. Their whole galaxy is filled with 9/11 Truthers who believed the Jedi were a false flag.
And, to be fair to Lucas’ shitty story telling, from the prequals we know that people knew what Jedi were but it is unclear if the general population knew much about their religion. To the majority they may have just been known as guardian knights, not space wizards.
+1 Luke’s Change
I had never seen that. It’s fucking brilliant.
Better story than Rogue One.
Watching the OT when I was a kid, I had a much longer timeline in my head for the pre ANH years. I sort of figured that Anakin was a grown ass man when he fathered Luke, that Obi-Wan was in his 60s or even 80s, if not older, that the Clone Wars had happened when Anakin and Ben were younger men and that the Jedi had had a slow decline before being wiped out which would explain the dismissal of the Force as a hokey religion.
My understanding is that the Jedi were both demonized and memory-holed by the Empire. Memory-holed in the Outer Rim where the Jedi wouldn’t have been as active, while demonized in the Galactic Core, where they were well known to operate visibly. I think it’s just not well explained, and requires somewhat of a leap of imagination to get to that, meaning you have to already be a major nerd to give enough of a shit to give it significant thought.
Because the entire Star Wars universe was crafted by someone who didn’t really care about internal consistency and was trying to push emotional buttons of potential fans in order to get them buying merchandise?
Because Lucas made it up as he went and retconned all the time? The most obvious being turning Vader into Luke’s Dad and Leia into his sister. Also Palpatine from a powerless puppet into a dictator that likes to shoot lightning.
Also the 12 parsecs line was apparently meant to be deliberate as Han is supposed to be making up bullshit to impress yokels.
Yeah. You even see Kenobi roll his eyes at Han’s obvious horse shit.
I’m gonna post this a lot:
I’m trying to get online editing gigs. I’ve been talking to UnCivil and have worked with him recently. I’m looking for clients that I can work for and get a base that I can work with or with people who know others who are interested in having someone to copyedit/editing (or even just proofreading) their work.
If anyone in the community knows anyone who’s interested or in need I would be much obliged to help out.
Thanks, Glibs. Sorry if you see this message multiple times in threads. I want to make sure that I get the message out to as many folk as possible.
Decided where you’re moving yet?
I’m gonna go to Chiang Mai and check that out.
Definitely where I’m thinking about. Will explore it in September. New girlfriend will color that decision.
I may need your services – last book I wrote needed some editing / proofreading. Current work(s) will need it too. I’m just getting too lazy ‘n’ tired to even write / publish like I used to.
Medieval peasants who believe words are sorcery that have power over them.
https://lidblog.com/official-nba-finals-hats/
“Medieval peasants who believe words are sorcery that have power over them.”
I saw that earlier and if there is a more succinct way to describe them, I haven’t heard it.
. Nevertheless, we tend to cast God in our own image, more or less. He resembles a human – usually an elderly man, full of gravitas, who’s still fairly handsome in his later years, like that World’s Most Interesting Man from the beer commercials. In other words, we tend to personify God, to think of Him as a conscious being, much as we ourselves are.
I’ve said that Babylon 5 had some clunky writing, but G’Kar trying to explain God isn’t.
The whole scene is great, especially the punchline, but this might be relevant:
Linked above already but then it can never be linked enough.
An you are right, while B5 had some occasionally clunky writing and the special effects were sub par and some of the performances were not great it had enough moments of pure unadulterated greatness that it deserves. Andreas Katsulas’s performance as G’Kar and Peter Jurassik’s performance as Lando are probably the 2 best performances ever in the history of science fiction media (tv or movies)
Dammit. I think I’ve lost the ability to discern reality from satire with the far left.
Same here. I got sucked in by the story in the AM linx.
Parody is pretty much dead.
So I took son #1 and my wife to see the Han Solo movie.
It sucked, but less than most Star Wars movies do. One part that had me cracking up was the robot assistant to Lando acting as if Lando had a thing for it…. I thought it was a great joke; a robot completely misreading humans.
Then I discovered that it wasn’t a joke. That the SJWlords of Disney had decided to retcon Lando as a ‘pansexual’ and that he was supposed to be head over heels in love with his robot.
Jesus. No wonder post-Lucas star wars continues to suck… they have turned the franchise over to people that were just as moronic.
‘Member when we all thought Star Wars was saved because Disney had bought it and got it out of Crazy Uncle George’s hands?
Pepperidge Farms Remembers.
Nothing short of nuclear war can save Star Wars.
Clone Wars and Rebels vary from “Good for a kid’s saturday morning cartoon” to “Fucking hell, that’s the stuff!”
Star Wars sucks because the creators want it to suck. When/If they want to fix it, it’ll be fixed.
I no longer pay to see Star Wars movies and don’t worry about their quality. They are meant for a younger demographic, not me.
The original movie was one of the first i saw in a theater – I loved it of course. People chase that high of that first movie and think Disney is going to somehow recreate it.
I like the original trilogy, but as far as I’m concerned, the rest of them don’t exist.
You mean the same Lawrence Kasdan who wrote Empire?
Anyway what really happened was that some interviewer asked about Lando’s sexuality and the writers said he was pansexual into order to be woke even though the movie doesn’t really show it which pisses off some SJWs as well!
No it was a joke.
The Disney execs might not have realized what the writers did, but there’s no way to interpret that robot character as anything other than a SJW parody. Same with the robosexual bit. You had characters on screen rolling their eyes at it.
My pet theory is that part of the behind the scenes drama and replacing the original director with Opie had to do with originally making Solo even more chock full of SJW goodness and the robot was an artifact of that. And when Opie took over, his reshoots recast what was serious Wokeness into humor.
Supposedly the original directors ad-libbed too much and Howard directed the script as written.
I’d bet on the opposite, when I think “humor” I think “guys who made Lego movie” not “Ron Howard”.
Ostensible reasons are what Winston posted, but how the fuck do you not catch that right away, and wait till supposedly 80% of the movie is shot, only to have the hack do reshoots?
https://www.google.ca/amp/s/www.cbr.com/han-solo-directors-cut-possible/amp/
I find the complaints about Star Wars SjWness pretty amusing considering how Lucas envisioned the Empire as evil merchants, Ewoks as the Vietcong, Palpatine as Nixon and created characters like Lando and Mon Mothma.
Empire as evil merchants
Trade Federation, not Empire.
Ewoks as the Vietcong
This is on point, yes. Derpier but less obnoxious version of LeGuin’s Word for World is Forest.
Palpatine as Nixon
Only if Nixon was also Ho Chi Min, and General Giap his secret apprentice. Although “Nixon learns poker” anecdote strikes me as something Palpatine would appreciate.
characters like Lando and Mon Mothma
You understand not everyone who complains about SJWs hates women and black people, no matter what SJWs say?
Lando was a great character who could be black or white – shit, you could swap Ford and Williams in their roles and they’d still be awesome characters.
And Mon Mothma was great simply because she was in charge, not Leia, doing that “imply universe is big without explaining everything” thing original movies were so good at.
The point is Lando and Mon Mothma were added by Lucas to show some non-white males. in other words the 1980s equivalent of being woke.
Was America of 1980 really that shocked by Negroes and Dames talking and doing stuff?
Only in ProgMinds. Just like today.
Obvi. Negroes need to get back on the plantation and till some fields. Dames can’t talk because they have their husband’s dick in their mouth and when they don’t they’re too busy giving birth and/or cooking.
http://poliscijedi.blogspot.com/2014/04/nixon-in-star-wars.html?m=1
So… Obama?
Let us not forget the shifty Asians of the Trade Federation: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NgoznacvSxc
Like of a lot of white liberals Lucas isn’t nearly as “woke” as he would like to think…
The worst thing about Star Wars was the return of “read the book to understand” which was something that Hollywood ditched in the 1910s.
I loved Star Wars when I came out. I apparently was the only person on the planet that didn’t like the story lines of Empire Strikes Back and the Return of the Jedi. In my mind, these two movies corrupted the pure popcorn cinema of the first. Luke should have killed Vador and won the heart of the Princess. Solo should have been dismayed at losing the girl right up until some buxom blonde walks into his peripheral vision. George fucked the first trilogy. Everything else has been pure crap (except I sort of liked Rogue One).
You weren’t as Empire was criticized at the time for not really doing anything and I am sure some people didn’t like the Vader twist. And Return was for a long time disliked by a section of the fanbase.
But of course internet groupthink and fanboyism has caused all of this to be forgotten…
Jar jar made people re-assess the Ewoks and discover maybe they weren’t so bad after all.
Weren’t the Ewoks originally suppose to be Wookies but at the time the CGI wasn’t good enough and the midgets were cheap so Ewoks were born? with that and the Nam metaphor in mind it makes some sense.
Still, the Nam metaphor doesn’t work. Not with the Empire as villains. It’s like the old saw about Ghandi trying that peaceful resistance shit with Nazis or Commies and seeing how far he’d get. The Empire would have some Space Agent Ultra-Orange to use along with Napalm raids that would give Kilgore a hardon he’d need to call his Dr. about.
Yes they were supposed to be Wookiees. This is why Chewie’s home in the Holiday Special looks like a Ewok home.
According to Gary Kurtz Ewoks were created to sell toys…
Also Kevin Smith thought Empire was underrated back when he made Clerks…
I’ll go this far – while I think ESB is quite good, I don’t see it as this masterpiece that everyone else does. I’d say the quality of the first three films coincides with the order of their release.
Of course Pauline Kael and Murray Rothbard thought the original Star Wars was soulless Baby Boomer trash…
The Empire getting its ass handed to it by a bunch of Stone Age midget space teddy bears ruined it for me.
Yea, that whole part was very illogical. This Empire obviously has extremely advanced technology, but their AT-ST walkers are so fragile that they explode from merely falling over? How the fuck does that work? Are they made of tinfoil and fueled by nitroglycerin??
It was supposed to be a ‘Nam metaphor by the way…
The Vietnamese drop-bears make it hardly even a metaphor.
A New Hope was revolutionary for its special effects and it really did the space cowboys vibe really well. Most of the really good, memorable lines in the original trilogy were ad libbed; Lucas was a concept guy, not at all a writer. I liked ESB and ROJ, they tied things up rather nicely IMO.
I’ve enjoyed the non-canon stuff (books and video games) a lot more than the prequels and the new Disney stuff.
Go on…
Paging Q
https://thechive.files.wordpress.com/2013/05/hot-busty-girls-41.jpg?w=500&h=666
A little hard in the face and a bit bolted-on, but I bet Han would be DTF.
Han would smash that then put her away wet on some distant planet.
a’la Peter Quill from ‘Guardians of the Galaxy’
Anyone read Lucas’ early drafts for Star Wars? Or just the plot summaries? Really gives the lowdown of Lucas’ strengths and shortcomings and in turn those of the prequels and the Disney movies. Lucas’ strengths are his loads and loads of pulpy space fantasy ideas. Weaknesses are his plots are convoluted as hell, come across as a bunch of setpieces tied together (this was my big issue with The Last Jedi) and he doesn’t really care about characters or dialogue.
Reading all this stuff really gives you an idea of just how strange Star Wars’ success actually was. I mean Lucas went from American Graffiti to this? And no one wonder Hollywood thought Star Wars would bomb.
Star Wars needed a good deal of help in the editing room
Interesting read. I always assumed the jedi were Taoists and the Force was chi.
Bear in mind I’m leaning towards the Judeo-Christian tradition of God in the following, but I don’t mean this to be exclusive to that tradition. It’s just the one I’m most familiar with.
As an atheist/maybe agnostic/whatever, God is a quandary. If God’s just a really powerful human, AKA the Santa Claus/Stern Grandfather God, then there really isn’t anything special about Him. If God’s a watchmaker, then there’s no reason to bother with him either, because the watch is already made and the point of a system is that it works without intervention. Intervening in the system breaks it. If God’s just everything, then, again, He kind of doesn’t figure, because he either has no will and so can’t be negotiated or pleaded with, or you’re a part of his will, which means that you don’t have will. If that’s true, asking God to do something doesn’t really make sense, if you think about it.
If I’ve got to imagine God, the God that makes sense is some combination of the Tao and of an immensely alien being, alien in the sense of being utterly unlike us. Maybe the deal is that God exists outside of time and space, and so while God is a “being”, God “isn’t” in any sense we’d be able to conceive of, being creatures rooted in time and space. So it’s not that God lets bad things happen to good people, per se, or that God is an “absentee landlord”, to quote Al Pacino, maybe it’s that things happen to us and are appraised within the only context with which we’re familiar, one that’s so limited from the perspective of God as to not even cross His radar. Or, put another way, if you exist outside of time and space, mortal death isn’t even a thing. If you exist outside of time, it would be difficult to imagine what it must be like to live in a fixed area of time, with a beginning and an end; hell, maybe it would seem irrelevant, seeing time from a perspective outside of it.
Just got off the road for a few days in the Outer Banks. Thanks for all the responses so far.