Thanks for the pick-me-up Kurt

Whether you agree or not, Vonnegut is always a provacative (or at least entertaining) read.

While it is easy do dismiss his rant as lacking perspective and full of cliches, I wonder if we shouldn't cut him a little slack and at least ponder or debate what he suggests. You could easily argue that he, due to his age and the events of the last 80 years that he has witnessed first hand, has more (better?) perspective than most.

Well maybe YOU could argue that, but in my book he's off his rocker. I'm not sure what you are saying here. Do you disagree with me or are you just concerned that there isn't enough pondering going on? Have YOU pondered what he wrote, and if so do you agree or disagree with his gist? Or do you think there just needs to be more pondering in general. Do we live in a world that is sorely lacking of sufficient pondering? Personally, I DID ponder what he wrote and, after pondering some more, thought it was "utterly lacking in perspective." I assure you my conclusions only came after reading the piece and doing some nice, healthy pondering. I thought I'd save readers time and give them the bottom line. Perhaps you want a more thorough fisking and public pondering, but frankly that's what this entire blog is dedicated to: pondering and debating these issues. I think I, like most bloggers, actually do a fair amount of pondering, relative to most.

As far as your point that he's old so we should ponder even harder, well maybe. But I know other, even older, folks who disagree with him totally, so then where are you? I'm afraid that the arguments will have to stand on their merits.

On one level, I was asking for more pondering. However that was before I was aware of (1) your blog's mission statement: "pondering and debating these issues" and (2) the intense pondering that took place prior to your post.

However, the real point, which may not have been clear from my post, is that KV is not lacking perspective. He merely has a different perspective than you have. If you are to live up to your blog's mission statement, then genuine debate rather than ad hominem attacks might be more productive and insightful.

Ok let me ponder on that.

What I meant by saying that KV was "utterly lacking in perspective" was not that he didn't HAVE a perspective, but that his perspective was out of proportion. Perhaps there is a semantic issue going on here. My point was simply that statements like "there is not a chance in hell of America's becoming humane and reasonable" is out of touch with what it means to be a "humane and reasonable" nation in this century. It is easy to pick on the flaws of such a large and powerful nation as the US--and folks like KV are expert at doing that. But to point out the flaws and short comings without comparing that to other nations across the globe and throughout history is not, imo, a balanced view. My view is closer to the ones that I refered to here: http://www.r21online.com/archives/000487.html, which is that in fact, despite some flaws, America is in fact an exceptional nation that has used its power, on balance, for good rather than evil. I reject the notion that the US is the primary SOURCE of evil in the world, which seems to be the KV and Michael Moore position, and frankly don't see how any sober analysis of the facts can lead reasonable people to this conclusion. Look at the absolute moral cowardice of the Arab and African communities when it comes to the Sudan, for example. Look at the virtual inefficacy of the European community when dealing with global tyranny (our friends the Brits excluded). Look at how morally bankrupt and ineffective the UN is. Are we owed no credit for defeating gobal fascism in the middle of last century, defeating global communism in the end of last century, and fighting global terror, jihadism, and Arab fascism, such as freeing 50 million or so folks in Afghanistan and Iraq, in this century? When no one but the US is willing or able to even tackle clear evil in the Sudan, or in North Korea, or in Iran, or in Syria, etc. is seems to be an utter distortion of perspective to say that "there is not a chance in hell of America's becoming humane and reasonable" because is the US is not humane and reasonable, who the hell on this earth IS? (I will have to make the obvious point here that I am NOT arguing that the US is always just and true, can do no wrong, nor that it has never made policy mistakes. But what is the standard fr measuring a nation? Perfection or reality?)

Yes, KV has a perspective, and I have a blog, and I can use this blog to say that his perspective sucks.