By the sword you did your work and by the sword you die1 will be recognised by all cultured folk as a quote from Aeschylus, spoken by Clytemnaestra to Agamemnon. My reference will confuse no-one I'm sure. But what are we to make of claims that this is a serious violation of Lebanese sovereignty? Lebanon is not, I think, officially at war with Israel; and moreover claims to be a sovereign state; so we must ask why armed forces are, and have been for quite some time, firing missiles from Lebanon into Israel, with no apparent attempt by the Lebanese state to prevent this? The answer I think is that Lebanon is not, despite its claims, really a SovState2. Instead it is a very weak state, whose chief problem is an infestation of Hezbollah. If they get really lucky, Israel may help them eradicate it. The real problem is Iran sponsoring all this nonsense of course; without their malignity, Hezbollah would collapse.Elon Musk’s SpaceX satellites an ‘existential threat to astronomy’ - predictably, all the ideas are "more regulation". There's not even a thought of cost-benefit analysis: is Starlink a better use than radio astronomy? Or even "would we be better off doing this from space?"
Mario Draghi’s best ideas are those Europe finds least comfortable (full report). But his answers are always things like "unify decision-making on public investments" so its all doomed7; the idea of dealing with over-regulation is still-born (he does manage to notice that "innovative firms that want to scale up are hindered by inconsistent and restrictive regulations" but his answer is to unify the regulations, not to think). And as the Economist says, the "recommendations are so numerous that policymakers will be able to pick and choose from among them"; this always happens. As an employee of a USAnian megacorp in the UK, I'm think I'm kinda insulated from the slow death of Yorp.
And then by happy chance, via Xitter, comes Foundations: Why Britain has stagnated. You'll notice, of course, that this compares Britain unfavourably with Yorp, particularly France, so is not perfectly in accord with me; nonetheless it is well-reasoned.
Update
[2024/10/02] Since I wrote the above the popcorn vendors have been making out like bandits. There's no shortage of talking heads proffering their foolishness, so I'll try to avoid adding much more. One notable theme has been of the "oh you know getting into these wars is very very dangerous" variety, written by idiots sat in comfortable arm chairs to be read by idiots sicac6, as though the Israelis who are actually risking their lives haven't thought of it; a sort-of variant on Dumb America. When done by e.g. Al-Jazmagi it's whistling in the wind / what their base want to hear; when done by the West it is more, I think, "intellectuals" desperate to be relevant in a time of soldiers (this seems to be a more decent assessment, though still somewhat pro-H; notice that what has happened wasn't on their list of possibilities). As I write this the Mad Mullahs have flung a pile of missiles at the kikes to little obvious effect5 but seems likely to provoke interesting consequences. I don't have a good feel for what will happen, but let me attempt a prognostication just to show how wrong I can be: the Israelis will hit Iran, taking out air defences (quite likely with US help), missile sites, and some of the nuke programme, and a token hit on oil facilities. And if they have any sense, take out their navy including the spy ship that helps the Houthis.
[2024/10/04] Iran’s supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, has vowed that Hezbollah in Lebanon and Hamas in Gaza will emerge with new leaders and will not back down says the Graun; this is convenient if you were under any illusion that Hammy or Hezzy were independent entities; but no, Iran speaks for them. He continued "the brilliant action of our armed forces a couple of nights ago was completely legal and legitimate”... any nation had the right to defend its soil and its interests in the face of aggressors. And yet it isn't clear to me how flinging a pile of missiles at Israel was helping defend his Iran; since the near-inevitable consequence is Israel attacking Iran, it might be the reverse.
[2024/10/08] Astonishingly, the Beeb manages Siniora is unflinching in his assessment of Lebanon’s lost sovereignty. "Practically, Lebanon as a state has been kidnapped by Hezbollah. And behind Hezbollah is Iran. They make up for that brief interlude of sanity by hiding it under a blame-misattributing headline of "Lebanon abandoned by international community - ex PM". And another note: from the Economist, which tracks attacks in Lebanon, I see that Hezbollah attacks on Israel haven't gone down, counting raw numbers. The Israeli incursion won't be a success until it goes to ~zero.
[2024/10/18] 'Death of Hamas mastermind' and One Direction tribute to 'brother' Liam: another on bites the dust. And I love the irony that in the fat Cold West, we can't tell the difference between news and entertainment. With Sinwar, as the Economist notes, there is some hope for change. The Pales could even see sense and surrender; it can't be much of a life being Hamas, after all; even fanaticism must have limits. But hopefully not before Israel twats the Iranian nooks. Speaking of the Mad Mullahs, they say "the spirit of resistance will be strengthened", which is exactly what would be bad for the Pales, but then the MMs never had Pale welfare at heart, only their own weird theocratic objectives.
[2024/10/26] The Israelis seem to have gone for the minimalist reply against Iran; mostly air defneces, following step one in the std.us playbook; and some missile production sites. This is somewhat disappointing, especially for the popcorn vendors. And the MMs seem to have gone for "that didn't hurt much" instead of getting Really Angry so likely all will go quiet for a bit on that front. But it must gall the MMs that the only thing that keeps the Israelis off them is US pressure; they have no ability to defend themselves; consider for contrast the laughable idea that the MMs might try to bomb Israel from the air.
Notes
1. Absurdly, Wiki's article on "live by the sword" insists that the quote is biblical, despite the play preceeding the New Testament by centuries. I tried to correct them but they wouldn't listen.
2. Despite this being the bleedin' obvious, which I said in June, the fuckwitted meeja still haven't realised. Update: this is a fine example: Lebanon's economy minister Amin Salam says "It is very clear if we decide, or if Hezbollah decides, or the whole country decides to take a big risk and gamble more in this war, we will be paying a very, very, very big price that will take Lebanon to a very difficult place, and it will take many, many years to get back from that place". So, errm, why not decide not to take that risk? Why not decide not to fight? The answer, of course, is that he is unable to say "oh shit we have no control of Hezbollah we wish they'd all fuck off but if I say that they'll kill me".
I find, belatedly, "the one responsible for the fire from Lebanon is not only Hezbollah or the terrorist elements that carry it out, but also the government of Lebanon and the Lebanese state that allows the shooting from its territory" from csis.org/analysis/coming-conflict-hezbollah.
3. Holy Shiite Batman: the Graun actually quotes someone saying "Get the official Lebanese army on the ground on the Israel Lebanon border – not Hezbollah not Iran – get state authority back into the south Lebanon border." Admittedly, buried in other ideas and obvs the Graun doesn't take this up, but even a brief interlude of sanity is welcome.
4, More [2024/09/26] shitty reporting from Politico; the bit they're missing is the obvious: Hezbollah refusing to accept a ceasefire (and no, the fuckwitted tying it to Gaza isn't sane).
5. Ironically, the only reported fatality is "Sameh al-Asali, a 37-year-old Palestinian from Gaza living in the occupied West Bank". However - correctly IMO - people are regarding it as a serious attack.
6. There's plenty of that in The Economist; just recently they seem to change their tune somewhat with What Hamas misunderstood about the Middle East.
7. Others have also noticed this.
Refs
* Against Censorship and Its Academic Supporters.
* Galileo Galilei vs The Holy Roman Catholic Church – Round: 5555555555…………
*Preliminary Milei Report Card - ACX.
* SLS is still a national disgrace.
* "In light of the wars and crises that threaten Arab and regional security, we have no choice but to restore the concept of the nation-state and respect its independence and sovereignty. The era of militias with its sectarian and regional dimensions has cost the Arabs dearly and burdened the region. The future is for security, peace and prosperity with an independent Arab project reconciled with its surroundings" take that, Hezzy and Hammy.
* Who is really in charge of Lebanon?
* Conservatives Are Lying on Immigrant Crime.
* Compendium of Writings on the October 7 War and Western Reactions to it (including Far-Left Support for Hamas is not an Aberration).
I really loved Draghi when I lived in Italy. But a shorter Draghi always comes down to this: Assume a can opener...
ReplyDeleteIt looks as if it might be Troyes but there are many gothique rayonnant candidates
ReplyDeleteYou have the style right: it is St Denis.
ReplyDeleteI guess the crowns should have been a giveaway except that I recall a very dark church in Troyes where Henry V got married and, knowing for certain that the cathedral was rayonnant, made a guess too far
ReplyDeleteOn the assumption that the Latin text comes from the Vulgate, you might want to reconsider how much Aeschylus was known prior to the Renaissance
ReplyDeletehttps://www.perplexity.ai/search/how-do-we-know-of-the-existenc-OGbgrOskQKKa9CFSfe0Aaw
In case the link does not work: "The Vulgate, a Latin translation of the Bible, was completed by St. Jerome in the late 4th century CE. The "Oresteia" by Aeschylus, written in the 5th century BCE, was known and studied throughout antiquity, but its rediscovery in the Renaissance occurred much later, around the 15th century CE, when classical texts were revived and translated into modern languages. Therefore, the Vulgate was written long before the rediscovery of the "Oresteia" during the Renaissance."
DeleteThat's an interesting point. I was remembering a somewhat annoyed discussion on Wiki... so I made this change, which leaves in place "is a [[proverb]] in the form of a parallel phrase, which can be traced back to the ancient Greek dramatist [[Aeschylus]] in 458 BCE". That then got modded to "which can be traced back to the Gospel of Matthew" which I didn't like, but didn't have the Greek to argue with (see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Live_by_the_sword,_die_by_the_sword#Not_actually_from_Aeschylus). I'm doubtful that the current refs there are good enough to say which is correct. But even if the phrase comes in that form in the Vulgate, it was presumably there in some form in the original; so whether "a male Jew who stood on the margin between traditional and nontraditional Jewish values and who was familiar with technical legal aspects of scripture being debated in his time" would have known Aeschylus must also be doubtful.
ReplyDeletePerhaps the person or group who wrote the Gospel according to St Matthew were aware of Aeschylus, or perhaps St Jerome was a fan - but by that time did Romans still learn Greek and read the "classics"? It still strikes me as one of those cases where people hit upon pithy ways of describing characteristic acts and their consequences which seem uncannily similar. To claim precedence for one such description seems futile . Obviously, at this point, I should provide other examples but they will only occur once I have posted - l'esprit de l'escalier, attributed to Diderot, Rousseau and probably others
ReplyDelete