Truth to corrupt power

As you watch this amazing video, in which a UN Watch spokesman unloads on the “Human Rights” Council, keep in mind the fact that the first thing the council did when he was finished was try to erase the speech from the record.  Then, remember what Winston Smith’s job was in Orwell’s 1984.

Hat tip:  Little Green Footballs

Be Sociable, Share!
  • ymarsakar

    I can’t remember any of the words I read in this post, Book….

  • ymarsakar

    Classical Liberals, Book, very persuasive, eh. They got the fire. The fire of true belief. Very useful, and very charismatic. It isn’t ugly like the Islamic Jihad and totalitarian systems.

    I’ve been wondering whether beauty is inherently good or evil. But I think it is pretty obvious that aesthetics is ethically neutral, a sort of tool in a sense. A tool to do what? Hrm, I think it is a tool to communicate values to human beings. In that sense, it is subjective. Good, happy, and nice things look beautiful, while crime, death, and agony looks ugly.

    Aesthetics or esthetics, communicates to the human soul, through sublime means. And your soul converts that message, somewhat, corrupts it or refines it. The most evil of things and people should also be beautiful. This mirrors a bit things from the bible concerning temptation and the Devil. How the Devil deceives and tempts, he appears not the way he really is, but in a pleasing fashion.

    If evil seeks to corrupt a human soul into its goal of total entropy, then evil has to at least appear beautiful. If we believe that beauty is a tool to communicate values to human souls, then logically that means both the good and the evil use it.

    Oration is similar as well, given the vid (classical Greek concerns), since oration communicates feelings and meanings, through gestures and voices. It can both inspire and terrorize.

    Since Good has to be better than evil, I tend to think the Good is also more beautiful, or should be more beautiful. Charismatic if you prefer a different description.