Moderators: Elvis, DrVolin, Jeff
Sweejak wrote:Or synchronicity, maybe it is as Paul Levy and others say; that we collectively 'dream up' our reality.
Sweejak wrote:Or synchronicity, maybe it is as Paul Levy and others say; that we collectively 'dream up' our reality.
OP ED wrote:or it could just be a coincidence.
Nordic wrote:Sweejak wrote:Or synchronicity, maybe it is as Paul Levy and others say; that we collectively 'dream up' our reality.
Then you've got that Barak guy in Israel.
It's all so strange ...
Thus it is that people detect a certain indefinable insincerity underneath Obama's words - insincerity is now built in to the language of politics. (It is also inherent in the contradictions of our civilization's deep ideology, but that is a different matter.) Playing by the rules of the political game, as Obama most definitely does, he can do naught but lie. His "hope" and "change" will be exposed as the brands they are. People will see that there is little cause to hope, and that not much has changed. The despair, cynicism, and sense of betrayal that will result will foment a dangerous crisis and, in the end, a profound renewal of public discourse that demands truth and has no patience with inauthenticity.
Above I asked, "Where is the indignation, the outrage, at the lies in which we are immersed?" Clearly, the answer lies deeper than the machinations of one or another faction of the power elite. It lies deeper than the subversion and control of the media. Part of our society's apathy arises from a subtle and profound disempowerment: the de-potentiation of language itself, along with all other forms of symbolic culture. Words are losing their power to create and to transform. The result is a tyranny that can never be overthrown, but will only proceed toward totality until it collapses under the weight of the multiple crises it inevitably generates.
... If the President decides to bomb Iran, do you know how he will do it? With words. He literally has the power to speak a war into being. Like the Old Testament Jehovah, we create the world with our words. Neither the President nor Congress really ever does anything but talk (and write). Unless you work with your hands as a carpenter or garbage collector, you are probably the same.
JackRiddler wrote:.
c2w?, sometimes a vigorous debunking needs to be shorter, not because anything you ever say isn't a great read (it is - it ALWAYS is, seriously), but because the more reasonable information you establish, the more surface area will be found for the goo to attach itself. In this example, the "lightning" bit right at the end, while interesting and welcome, as information may get our mystical etymologists/numerologists off on yet another absurdist track.
EDIT: Got rid of a bunch of stuff cos I don't feel like a pointless flame war right now.
.
compared2what? wrote:Nordic wrote:Sweejak wrote:Or synchronicity, maybe it is as Paul Levy and others say; that we collectively 'dream up' our reality.
Then you've got that Barak guy in Israel.
It's all so strange ...
"Barak" is a common surname in Israel, though I can't find anything indicating exactly how common. FWIW, without data, I think of it as approximately as common as, say, an English surname like "White" -- ie, not, like, at the Smith/Jones level, but common enough that most people probably know or know of one or more "[John/Jane] White."
Most Israelis of Ashkenazi origin (ie -- most Israelis) hebraicized their diaspora surnames in one of a few ways, including by assuming whatever Hebrew word had more or less the same consonants as an English-to-Hebrew transliteration of the name they arrived with. (Hebrew doesn't really have vowels.) So "Barak" was kind of a go-to Hebraicization for a lot of Bergs, Bergmans, Berkowitzes, Bergers, Bercynskis, Berkows, Bieringers, Barkovskis, Behrenbacks, Bergsteins, Borovskis, Bruckers, Brechts, Brachmanns, and all the other numerous Polish-or-German-or-Slavic surnames derived from town-names or traditional occupations that include consonants that can, at a stretch transliterate in part as "Bet" followed in some order by "Resh" "Kaf" or "Gimel," as well as, possibly, "He" and "Lamed," although I didn't list any of those.
It means "lightning" in Hebrew. And...um. Well. I notice that's too much information already. So: And...oops, sorry.
BARACK WAS NAMED AFTER HIS FATHER [Barack Obama Sr.], WHO WAS NAMED AFTER HIS FATHER.
Obama was named the way many men name their sons: after his father. Why a name that isn't traditionally heard in America should be considered a hindrance, I don't know, especially because we are a melting pot of people from all over the world. In any case, here are the facts, to clear up the misconceptions.
The meaning of the name Barack is Blessed. The origin of the name Barack is African. (Barack also mentions this in his speech at the 2004 Democratic Convention. SOURCE.) It is a linguistic cognate of the Hebrew Baruch.
http://my.barackobama.com/page/communit ... voter/CPDM
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 167 guests