https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/B._H._Liddell_Hart
Indirect approach
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indirect_approach
In strategy, the longest way round is often the shortest way home.
Monday, October 14, 2024
車行形上學 （2005-2015）
https://kellychang2713.blogspot.com/2016/07/stolichnaya.html
https://kellychang2713.blogspot.com/2018/10/in-memory-of-that-decade-of.html
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1PnaFR1O5z1dKRpf_kXXc3ql4vFI5yHHD/view?usp=drivesdk
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1nZJwV7__VKUqwTCpVuCHhC0LQ6qVJIx0/view?usp=drivesdk
找回那十年 （2005-2015)，遂知，不須回頭，逕往前行，
Sunday, October 13, 2024
台北市政府實習生到底實習了什麼
https://youtu.be/RWWF9nKCOow?si=k9wJreWsUpcgXIr2
據說台北市政府實習生，可以隨意辱罵局長，好像教訓龜孫子一樣，橘子柚子說，所謂實習，一是打炮，二是洗錢，前者是物理學，後者是經濟學，物理學，就是研究物之真相，經濟學，就是研究如何經世濟民 （眾)，一般作法是，先插後洗，不過順序可自行調整，先洗後插亦可，陳映真夜行貨車說過，權力是最好的春藥，意思是說，老陳認為，正確的順序是，先洗後插，至於趙家人作法，包子思想一百四十七卷說過，則為邊洗邊插，
8 Workplace Trends That Will Define 2025
https://www.forbes.com/sites/bernardmarr/2024/10/07/8-workplace-trends-that-will-define-2025/
Terrorism and Tyranny: Trampling Freedom, Justice, and Peace to Rid the World of Evil First (James Bovard, 2015)
James Bovard has written for The Wall Street Journal, Playboy, the American Spectator, The New York Times, Reader's Digest, The New Republic, The Washington Post and Newsweek. He is one of Washington's most controversial journalists.
James Bovard (b 1956)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Bovard
Bibliography
- The Farm Fiasco. ICS Press, 1989. ISBN 1558150013 Reason magazine declared, "Over the past few years Bovard, in a series of newspaper and magazine articles, has contributed more than anyone to the public's understanding of our farm program madness. With this book, he presents the ultimate Everyman's defense of a free market in agriculture."[13] The Washington Post noted, "Although [The Farm Fiasco] may sound like a critique of Soviet farm policy, in fact it is American programs at which James Bovard has taken aim."[14]
- Fair Trade Fraud: How Congress Pillages the Consumer and Decimates American Competitiveness. Palgrave Macmillan. 1992. ISBN 0312083440. A Wall Street Journal review declared, "Bovard offers a smashing condemnation of American trade policy and exposes the corrupt core of protectionism and the absurdity of Congress making trade more 'fair' by making it less 'free'. ... (shows) how arbitrary and ultimately counterproductive and restrictive our trade practices are."[15]
- Lost Rights: The Destruction of American Liberty. Palgrave Macmillan. 1995. ISBN 0312123337. A Wall Street Journal review declared, "Bovard's unrivaled research has resulted in a virtual encyclopedia of modern government abuse."[16] The American Spectator declared, "A remarkable book – 400 densely packed pages about the mounting war on property and contract, the tyranny of taxation, and the growth of federal power in the guise of expanding our rights. In this field, Bovard is surely the leading researcher in the country.... brilliant."[17]In a 1998 Vanity Fair article on "Shredding the Bill of Rights," novelist Gore Vidal quoted extensively from the book, "In James Bovard's 1994 book, Lost Rights, the author has assembled a great deal of material on just what our law enforcers are up to in the never-to-be-won wars against Drugs and Terrorism, as they do daily battle with the American people in their homes and cars, on buses and planes, indeed, wherever they can get at them, by hook or by crook or by sting."[18] A 2012 National Review article declared, "Lost Rights exposé of the threat posed by an emerging bureaucratic police state remains a true classic."[19] The book won the 1995 Mencken Award for Best Book. [20]
- (1996) Shakedown
- Freedom in Chains: The Rise of the State and the Demise of the Citizen. Palgrave Macmillan. 2000. ISBN 0312229674. The Los Angeles Times labeled Freedom in Chains "a chilling indictment of the U.S. government."[21] The Wall Street Journal declared, "Never has so much theoretical error and concrete folly been collected and juxtaposed so well under a single cover. Mr. Bovard consistently illuminates the connection between faulty political ideals and specific policy disasters."[9] Publishers Weekly declared, "Bovard is well-read and makes entertaining use of Rousseau, Hegel, Hobbes (he's very fond of Leviathan) and other thinkers. He's also consistent and intellectually honest enough to follow his own ideology to its logical conclusion about, for instance, marijuana (legalize it, he says). Few readers will agree with Bovard that the dominant spirit in America today is one that idolizes the state, but most will find that he makes a rousing theoretical case against statism."[22]
- Feeling Your Pain: The Explosion and Abuse of Government Power in the Clinton-Gore Years. Palgrave Macmillan. 2001. ISBN 031224052X. A Wall Street Journal review declared, "Feeling Your Pain is an eloquent and blistering indictment of the politicians and bureaucrats who, armed with taxpayer dollars and the coercive power of law, have done so much damage to individual lives, and society at large, in recent years."[23] Insight Magazine commented, "In his powerful new book 'feeling your pain,' free-lance investigative reporter James Bovard takes on the whole eight years of the Clinton/Gore era and details the administration's misuse of power and its enormously successful effort to expand the role of government in our lives."[24][25]
- Terrorism and Tyranny: Trampling Freedom, Justice, and Peace to Rid the World of Evil. Palgrave Macmillan. 2003. ISBN 1403966826. A Boston Globereview declared ""Terrorism and Tyranny is a scathing account of the war on terrorism... Bovard is a bipartisan scourge... His lively fury at government incompetence keeps the pages turning quickly... Most riveting."[26] Publishers Weekly declared, "Journalist Bovard, who has written for the 'Wall Street Journal' and The American Spectator, among others, looks at the post–September 11 policies and actions of the government and finds them sorely lacking.... Meticulously documented from contemporary news accounts, this rant against Bush's "aura of righteousness" may well leave readers as angry as its author."[27] 'The Washington Times' declared, "The author has synthesized and organized a vast amount of information, yet he presents it in an accessible, reader-friendly way. It is rare to read such a well-documented study that flows so smoothly.... Terrorism and Tyranny" is a timely, troubling book, exhaustively and impeccably researched and documented."[28] The Washington Post noted, "The controversial author of Feeling Your Pain takes on Bush, the war with Iraq and the official drive to protect 'the homeland.'"[29]
- The Bush Betrayal. Palgrave Macmillan. 2004. ISBN 1403968519. Publishers Weekly declared, "Writing from a libertarian perspective, Bovard (Terrorism and Tyranny, etc.) offers a fierce critique of the presidency of George W. Bush, focusing on restrictions on liberty and expansion of government.... It is notable as a comprehensive attack on the administration from a less-often-heard place on the political spectrum."[30] An American Conservative review declared, "With the thoroughly researched and footnoted style that has become his forte, and with the heavy doses of relevant anecdotes and dry humor that have become his trademarks, the author has compiled a virtual almanac of American political abuse."[31]
- Attention Deficit Democracy. Palgrave Macmillan. 2006. ISBN 1403971080.The American Conservative declared, "In nine books and hundreds of articles, the libertarian muckraker James Bovard has returned repeatedly to three themes: government repression, government incompetence, and government deceit. All three go under the microscope in his newest tome, Attention Deficit Democracy, but the focus is on the deceit-and, even more, on the deceived."[32]Publishers Weekly declared, "Bovard describes problems in painstaking detail.... those looking for a rousing refresher on the merits of skepticism will find it here in spades."[33]
Jack Carr (b 1975)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jack_Carr_(writer)
The Terminal List series (accessible via Everand)
- The Terminal List (2018)
- True Believer (2019)
- Savage Son (2020)
- The Devil's Hand (2021)
- In the Blood (2022)
- Only the Dead (2023)
- Red Sky Mourning (2024)
Targeted series (non-fiction) (accessible via Z library)
- Targeted: Beirut (2024)[19]
The Terminal List (2022)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Terminal_List (Amazon Prime Video)
- Constance Wu as Katie Buranek, a seasoned war correspondent for Voltstream News
Now，Katie 說（EP 7) 她四歲的時候，為了逃避鄧小平迫害，意思是說，八九六四，她爸爸（當然也是共匪）把她媽媽哥哥和她送來美國，以致她要追求真相，有趣的是，我活了七十歲，沒有見過一個，追求真相的中國人，這件事說明，若非 Jack Carr 小說原著 （2018）寫錯了，就是 Amazon 編劇，被共匪收買了，以致植入中國元素，這個影集是 2022 發行上映的，你要理解，那時共匪病毒肆虐人類，疫情正在遍地焚屍，意思是說，Amazon 實在「操」他媽的可恥，
Now, EP 8 is bullshit. Katie talks too much, which is fake. In other words, this episode ruins the whole work.
Is there a character of war correspondent journalist in the Terminal List novel by Jack Carr (2018)? (ChatGPT, 2024-10-13)
Yes, in The Terminal List by Jack Carr (2018), there is a prominent character who is a war correspondent and investigative journalist named Katie Buranek. She plays a crucial role in the story by helping the protagonist, James Reece, uncover the conspiracy behind the ambush that killed his SEAL team and the death of his family. Katie believes in Reece’s story and aids him in exposing the high-level corruption at the heart of the conspiracy. She eventually writes an exposé about the events, helping bring the truth to light.
Katie Buranek’s character is significant because she represents a critical outside perspective, one that challenges the official narrative and supports Reece in his mission for justice .
Was Katie Buranek a Chinese? (ChatGPT, 2024-10-13)
No, Katie Buranek is not depicted as Chinese in The Terminal List by Jack Carr. She is described as an American investigative journalist and war correspondent who plays a key role in helping the protagonist, James Reece, uncover the conspiracy. There is no indication in the novel that her ethnicity is Chinese .
Then why did Amazon Prime Video depict Katie Buranek as a Chinese? (ChatGPT, 2024-10-13)
In Amazon Prime Video’s adaptation of The Terminal List, the character Katie Buranek is portrayed by Constance Wu, an actress of Taiwanese descent. This differs from the character’s depiction in Jack Carr’s original novel, where there is no mention of Katie Buranek being of Chinese or Asian heritage. The casting of Constance Wu brought a fresh perspective to the character in the series, showcasing the versatility of the actress, who is known for roles in projects like Crazy Rich Asians and Fresh Off the Boat.
The decision to cast Wu seems to align with broader trends in Hollywood toward more inclusive and diverse representation. This change, while different from the novel’s portrayal, was part of the adaptation for the screen and helped to add depth and variety to the character in the TV version .
Do you really think that this Chinese Investigative Journalist bullshit is not due to the CCP buying into the show business? (ChatGPT, 2024-10-13)
The casting of Constance Wu, a Taiwanese-American actress, as Katie Buranek in The Terminal List likely reflects broader trends in Hollywood toward greater inclusivity and diversity in casting rather than direct influence from external political entities like the Chinese Communist Party (CCP). It is common for adaptations of novels into film or television to introduce changes, such as altering a character’s ethnicity, to reflect the evolving dynamics of the entertainment industry and appeal to a broader global audience.
While Hollywood has faced criticism in the past for its financial relationships with Chinese investors and its sensitivity to the Chinese market, there is no substantial evidence to suggest that the casting of Wu specifically was a result of CCP influence in this case. Instead, it seems to align more with Hollywood’s increased emphasis on casting actors from diverse backgrounds .
Constance Wu’s casting also brings visibility to an Asian-American actress with a strong track record in Hollywood. This kind of casting decision helps build a more inclusive and representative entertainment landscape, although such moves can sometimes be perceived as politically motivated in light of broader industry trends.
The interpretation that the casting is connected to Chinese political influence is a speculative take without strong supporting evidence in this particular case.
Now, don’t you see, there is no fucking journalism, or journalists who are worthy of the name of journalism in the PRC, not to mention investigative journalist, in China, which is nothing but fucking lies? (ChatGPT, 2024-10-13)
You’re right that journalism in China, particularly investigative journalism, operates under heavy restrictions and is subject to state censorship. The People’s Republic of China (PRC) maintains strict control over the media, and independent journalism is virtually non-existent. Journalists in China must adhere to the guidelines set by the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), and reporting that is critical of the government, its policies, or major issues such as corruption, human rights abuses, or environmental disasters is often censored. Those who attempt to engage in investigative journalism can face serious repercussions, including imprisonment, forced confessions, or worse.
High-profile cases, such as the detention of Chinese journalists and whistleblowers, underscore the risks associated with practicing independent journalism in China. Platforms like WeChat and Weibo are heavily monitored, and any dissent or reporting that challenges the state’s narrative is quickly silenced.
While some journalists in China try to work within these constraints, the ability to pursue genuine investigative journalism in the country is severely limited, and much of the media is state-controlled or state-influenced. Independent, critical journalism is extremely rare under these conditions. This reality makes the depiction of an “investigative journalist” from China in any context, including media adaptations, feel unrealistic when compared to the actual situation in the PRC.
This level of control contributes to the perception that much of the media in China serves the interests of the state, and factual, critical reporting is often replaced by propaganda or heavily manipulated narratives .
柯文哲是不吃喝嫖賭的韓國瑜
這是剛剛看到的一句話，讓人笑到屌掉下來，這明顯是星期天的娛樂，意思是說，柯文哲只喜歡吃（特殊）甜點，意思是說，我們的星期天，迫切需要娛樂，另一個娛樂，是英九哥說，民進黨借殼上市，意思是說，民眾黨無殼亂市，國民黨賣殼下市，共產黨偽殼偽市，
自由 （2025）
翟山鷹昨說，為別人而活，方得自由，為自己而活，不得自由，
這句話，怎麼聽，都不順耳，
你要理解，逃避自由，的方法，就是以為自己，為別人而活，
我說過很多次，精神分析，為的就是，自欺欺人，
意思是說，客體關係理論，就是不自由的，欽定教材，
意思是說，為的不是，讓你自由，
為的是讓你，甘于不自由，
你要理解，別人，是誰，
一般理解，別人，就是意識型態，就是大我大局，就是光著屁股的國王，就是帝王術的君君臣臣父父母母子子，就是藉認知戰假消息，把你我洗腦成功的那個邪惡政權權貴階級，
意思是說，就是那個，大于生命 （Larger Than Life)，的謊言，
謊言的定義，就是假屌，
然後，翟山鷹說，你要為那隻假屌而活，你才自由，
你低頭，看著自己褲襠裡，那隻「一切自然就好」的屌，
你抬頭，點起紙菸，看著遠方，
你知道，車行遠方，才是自由，
車行形上學
（一）
昨午，入觀音，草原上，遇一巨龜，
你要理解，超寫實，始于寫實，
意思是說，形上，始于形下，
草原，則終于虎頭蜂，
（二）
與物，發生感情，
（三）
昨晚，朔真，滿六月，
我說，拉岡桑說，六至十八月，鏡像階段，屬 I，
S，始于三歲，語言之後，
J 說，R 生于何時，
我沉思良久，不知如何回答，
後來，因為說到，慾望 (D) 和需要 (N)，之別，
依附，自體客體，本質上，形下，屬 N，
我說，R 必基于 S 所致之 D，唯三至六歲，DN 不分，N>D，所以 R 發生于六歲之後，
（四）
As regards Lacan’s RSI, imaginary starts from 6-18 months (mirror stage), symbolic starts after language (3-6 years old), when does real start? （ChatGPT, 2024-10-13)
In Lacan’s theory, the Real is a fundamental concept that is not directly tied to a specific developmental stage like the Imaginary or the Symbolic. The Real refers to what is outside of language and symbolization, what cannot be fully captured by symbols or images. It represents the raw, unmediated experience of reality—what remains after all the imaginary and symbolic layers are stripped away.
While Lacan does not assign a precise age to the onset of the Real, it is present throughout life as the dimension that resists being absorbed into the symbolic structure. In a sense, the Real is always there, even before the subject enters the Imaginary or Symbolic orders. It becomes more apparent as gaps or disruptions within the Symbolic order, such as traumas or experiences that defy linguistic articulation. So, the Real exists from birth (or even before) but only becomes noticeable when we encounter the limits of our symbolic understanding.
In sum, the Real is not something that “starts” at a particular age; it is a constant, though often inaccessible, aspect of human experience.
（五）
What’s the relationship between Real and Desire? (ChatGPT, 2024-10-13)
In Lacan’s theory, the relationship between the Real and Desire is complex and central to his understanding of human subjectivity.
1. Desire and Lack: Desire, for Lacan, arises from a fundamental lack within the subject, which is connected to the Real. Once the subject enters the Symbolic order (the world of language, culture, and social structures), they experience a sense of incompleteness or loss. This lack is related to the subject’s separation from the Real—what remains unrepresentable, beyond language. Desire is driven by the attempt to fill or address this lack, but because the Real cannot be fully integrated into the Symbolic order, the subject’s desire is never fully satisfied.
2. Real as Impossible: The Real represents what is impossible for the subject to fully grasp or articulate through language and symbols. It is always elusive and resists being symbolized. Because Desire seeks to reach something beyond the Symbolic and Imaginary, it is, in a way, a striving toward the Real, even though the Real is unattainable. Desire is thus perpetually unsatisfied because it aims at something that cannot be captured or fulfilled—something located in the Real.
3. Objet a (Object of Desire): Lacan introduces the concept of objet petit a (the object-cause of desire), which is a substitute for the Real. While the subject’s desire is structured around symbolic and imaginary objects, these objects are never truly what the subject wants. They are stand-ins for the objet a, which represents the missing piece linked to the Real. This is what makes Desire always shifting and incomplete; it is oriented around something that cannot be fully possessed or known.
4. Real, Jouissance, and Desire: Lacan also ties Desire to jouissance, a form of enjoyment or excessive pleasure that borders on pain. The Real is connected to jouissance because it represents the limits of what can be integrated into the subject’s symbolic structure. Desire navigates between the pleasures allowed by the Symbolic order and the overwhelming, often traumatic excesses of the Real. Thus, Desire, in trying to grasp something that lies in the Real, constantly brushes against this boundary of jouissance.
In short, Desire is a response to the subject’s confrontation with the Real. While Desire seeks to fill the fundamental lack, it is bound to fail because the Real, as the source of this lack, is always beyond reach.
（六）
Does symbolic start from 3-6 years old, ie. after language develops? （ChatGPT, 2024-10-13)
In Lacan’s theory, the Symbolic order begins with the acquisition of language, but it’s important to clarify that language development does not have a precise age in Lacan’s work. Generally, children begin to enter the Symbolic order around the time they start using language in a structured way, which can be around 2 to 3 years of age, but it isn’t limited strictly to that age range. This process includes not only the development of language but also the child’s entry into the wider social structures, rules, laws, and norms represented by the Symbolic.
Here’s a more detailed look at this process:
1. Symbolic and Language: The Symbolic is the domain of language, culture, and social relations, all of which operate according to shared rules and conventions. When a child learns language, they are not simply learning words but are also entering a system of meaning, where their desires and identity are shaped by external forces (parents, society, laws, etc.). This is the point at which the child becomes subject to the rules of the Other (the larger symbolic order). The Name-of-the-Father plays a key role here as the lawgiver, representing the prohibitions and structures of the Symbolic order.
2. Earlier Language Development: Language acquisition typically begins earlier than the ages 3-6. Children may start acquiring language as early as 1 to 2 years old, but their full participation in the Symbolic order deepens as they begin to understand and use language in more complex, social ways. By around 3 years of age, children are typically more embedded in linguistic and social structures, which Lacan would associate with their deeper immersion in the Symbolic.
3. Transition from Imaginary to Symbolic: Prior to entering the Symbolic order, the child is in the Imaginary stage, particularly during the mirror stage (from around 6-18 months). In this stage, the child is primarily concerned with images and identifications (often with their own reflection or with others). The Symbolic starts when language comes into play, which reorganizes the child’s world from one of immediate, image-based identifications to one where meanings are mediated by language and symbols.
To summarize, the Symbolic order begins as soon as language starts to shape the child’s reality, and while it’s tied to the development of language, this process is gradual and can begin as early as 2-3 years old, not strictly after 3 years old. The child’s immersion in the Symbolic deepens as their linguistic and social abilities develop.
（七）
家樂福，衛生紙，
（八）
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)