volco

As a longtime fan of Mike Judge's King of the Hill series, I've recently downloaded 2006 movie "Idiocracy". I've gotta say that I've never laughed so much in my life. It makes ordinary people feel like Hank Hill, and it produced me an almoast convulsive laughter mixed with outrageous indignation. The movie's about an army librarian selected for being the most "average" being frozen, mistakenly, for 500 years. As he wakes up he finds a world where as a product of over-breeding of the worst the average IQ has lowered considerably. It's really an exaggerated parody of a liberal, populist, world showing the worst aspects of consumersim. I just want to know what you think about it before I go on.

In defence of material excess. I remember the joy of the first time I'be been to New York. I love skycrapers. I loved the "minimalistic" beauty of the Twin Towers, I still hold the pictures I've taken from the WTC plaza as some of the best I've ever taken (I should post them!). My favorite spot in the city was the central atrium at Citicorp Center, but I still remember the Trump Tower as something quiet special. At the time I did not like the gold and pink of its atrium, nor all of its bizantine over-ornamentation, but the fact that this was a -residential- tower named after a single individual who made it possible, made it feel like the materialization of freedom. I was 13 at the time and wanted to be an architect, and I felt a little frustrated by the fact that it is hard to keep a creation an individual product of my mind when the client that would make it possible has to be a group. Trump Tower, and I guess Donald Trump himself, was for me a symbol that individual freedom can trascend scale (and I think this is central to egoism and capitalism). I hate staining a nice memory with this but, chicoflaco, what the hell! I quote from Capitalism TUI p.33: Britannica article, AR's caption: "...much private expenditure goes for wants that are not very urgent in any fundamental sense. (Urgent - to whom? Which wants are "fundamental" beyond a cave, a bearskin, and a chunk of raw meat?)..." The point is self evident: there is no need, and no right, for a roof to top personal ambition.

I agree that Iran is the only national face of jihad, but islam, much like communism, wants to create a non national world, a world caliphate. Iran is as much a threat as Saudi Arabia or Hamburg for the strategic advantage they provide the highly distributed network of islamic terrorism. To nuke Iran would not negatively affect the potential and current european-based terrorists who receive their check from riyad and attack America, on the contrary, it would provide them a moral saction to retaliate with nuclear weapons. It would also inflamate all the on-the-fence moslems The Soviet Union served as model for thirdworldish communists to look up to and ultimately to look down to. We didn't beat the USSR in a war we just outevolved them. The same thing should happen to Islam, de jure in Iran and de facto in dozen more countries. Islamic terrorism is kinda like communist guerrilla without the national factor. It was easier to beat the nazis because unlike communists and moslems, fascists are nationalists. Jihad is the ungrateful barbarian child of decolonization. The luddite mystic and racist philosophy Jihad represents can still be fought, but like communism it will probably be digested. I don't wanna sound libertarian but the real struggle is domestic, inmunological, its faces being multiculturalism, political correctness, environmentalism and 9/11.