Let it go Lance

le_patron

The short feature was about this book if anyone wanted to know and missed it.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/books/2010/ja ... cy-ellmann

Tusher

Le Patron, thankyou so much for this link.
I'm going to print it out and take it into work tomorrow- I don't work in terminal care anymore, but most of my colleagues have done so in the past, as I did, and I'll certainly be forwarding the link to my friends who are are still with MacMillan. A superb organisation, BTW.

And it's not to say there's nothing wrong with being positive or even cheerful in the face of serious illness (and there are life threatening illnesses out there that are not cancer), but this article sums up beautifully the relentless guilt that afflicts the terminally ill who are ready to turn their thoughts and energy to dying as they want.

Because we're all going to die someday, someway. And if we are granted the time to know that that date is near, we should feel free to ready ourselves for it, to embrace it, just as we embrace life.

BikingBernie

Great stuff Tusher and le Patron. It's good to see that I am not alone in my view that the 'Armstrong syndrome' is not the force for good that it is usually portrayed to be. It's also good to see more confirmation of my view the myth of 'the power of positive thinking' is simply a reflection on the greater 'American' myth that all people achieve in their lives, or do not achieve, can be placed squarely at the feet of the individual themselves. To quote from that book review:

---

Positive types aren't just misled, they're mean. "Negative people suck!" claims one American motivational coach, an exemplar of the "empathy deficit" in positive thinking. The pitiless message to the powerless from all these motivational speakers, megachurch preachers, self-help gurus and other assorted selfishness-sellers is that sad sacks get what they deserve.

Promoting the idea that happiness is within your grasp is in the interests of corporations trying to bamboozle an overworked and underpaid workforce. It's also favoured by churches trying to get rich quick off the American dream. Ehrenreich traces the fad from Calvinist self-control through Christian Science to blatant assumptions of the holiness of cash. Informing the uneducated and unmedicated that their plight is all their own fault is followed up by instructions for making anything you desire – from a new TV screen to a trip to Mexico – "materialise" through mind control. The censorship of negative opinion combines perfectly with the American policy of each man for himself in the best of all possible worlds.

This is the philosophy that gave us the smart bomb, the space programme, sub-prime mortgages, plenty of psychopaths and Sarah Palin.

...It's when writing about the cancer industry that she's at her most eloquent. When she got breast cancer, Ehrenreich found that not only did she have to confront a life-threatening illness but also a whole bunch of idiotic pink products, from proud cancer-defying sweatshirts and breast cancer candles, to a teddy bear with a breast-cancer ribbon sewn on its chest.

Cancer victims are expected to exude happiness – otherwise you're apparently exposing yourself, and fellow cancer patients who come into contact with you, to toxic negativity.

---

As the philosopher Alain de Botton has argued in his book 'Status Anxiety' these same, essentially Darwinian, attitudes underpin contemporary attitudes toward inequality and wealth. These hold that the most valuable people in society are the wealthy, not ordinary people. In addition, whether one is ‘successful’ in life or not is held to be a direct reflection of one’s moral worth as a human being. The 'flip side' of the ‘American’ view that everyone is free to achieve whatever they want to in their lives also encourages the view that anyone who does not succeed has only themselves to blame. These attitudes also lead to the 'empathy deficit' noted above, with the common view being that the poor are immoral and dishonest and don’t succeed because they are idle and unintelligent, as such do not deserve help or sympathy from others.

calvjones

Nice summary of de Botton's book there BB. Makes one wonder why he had to waste so much paper saying it over 200 pages.

GeorgeShaw

These hold that the most valuable people in society are the wealthy, not ordinary people. In addition, whether one is ‘successful’ in life or not is held to be a direct reflection of one’s moral worth as a human being. The 'flip side' of the ‘American’ view that everyone is free to achieve whatever they want to in their lives also encourages the view that anyone who does not succeed has only themselves to blame. These attitudes also lead to the 'empathy deficit' noted above, with the common view being that the poor are immoral and dishonest and don’t succeed because they are idle and unintelligent, as such do not deserve help or sympathy from others.

This is also a neat summary of Tony Blair's view of "meritocracy".

le_patron

A balance is required. It’s amazing what you achieve with a positive outlook and conviction, but clearly it has gone way too far in the American self-help industry (especially with life-threatening medical issues).

I work for a US company in the UK and when it first kicked off as a rapidly expanding start-up in the late 90’s, there was a jarring clash of cultures between the American ‘can-do’ culture and the British ‘probably can’t’ culture.

A senior US based manager referenced this in a talk to employees a few years ago and summed it up quite well. It’s all a big over-simplified generalisation of course, but Americans tend to think more positively because in the short history of the nation generally everything tried has worked, so why not think big ? There's one big opportunity out there and there is a track record of success, manifest destiny and all that (a few blips with the depression and some soul searching in the late 70’s before Reagan and Rocky came along).

The British (and rest of old world) in contrast have thousands of years of often bitter experience to draw on, have seen fortune ebb and flow and tend to be more realists. If you can strike a healthy balance between the two, that’s probably a good thing.

BikingBernie

GeorgeShaw wrote:

These hold that the most valuable people in society are the wealthy, not ordinary people. In addition, whether one is ‘successful’ in life or not is held to be a direct reflection of one’s moral worth as a human being. The 'flip side' of the ‘American’ view that everyone is free to achieve whatever they want to in their lives also encourages the view that anyone who does not succeed has only themselves to blame. These attitudes also lead to the 'empathy deficit' noted above, with the common view being that the poor are immoral and dishonest and don’t succeed because they are idle and unintelligent, as such do not deserve help or sympathy from others.

This is also a neat summary of Tony Blair's view of "meritocracy".

Unfortunately, this is probably the dominant mindset in the world today, and many people, especially in the USA it seems, are so brainwashed by those who stand to benefit by the promotion of this world view that they can't even conceive that a different way of viewing the nature of inequality, wealth, power and both individual and collective responsibility is possible.

As De Botton points out, such a world view is actually quite a recent phenomena, and it wasn't that long ago when the poor were held to be the most important people in society (working the land and so saving everyone in society from starvation), when no one could be 'blamed' for been poor (as this was 'God's' will) and when the rich were regarded as being essentially parasites, living off the work of the poor.

GeorgeShaw

Unfortunately, this is probably the dominant mindset in the developed world today

Small edit.

And it's remarkable that the home of "you can do anything if you try hard enough" has the lowest social mobility in the developed world.

The British (and rest of old world) in contrast have thousands of years of often bitter experience to draw on, have seen fortune ebb and flow and tend to be more realists.

Except that - like the US - we haven't had an occupying army on our soil for many years (although we have experienced some of the horrors of war), unlike most of the rest of Europe.

BikingBernie

le patron wrote:

It’s all a big over-simplified generalisation of course, but Americans tend to think more positively because in the short history of the nation generally everything tried has worked, so why not think big ?There's one big opportunity out there and there is a track record of success, manifest destiny and all that...The British (and rest of old world) in contrast have thousands of years of often bitter experience to draw on...

I would say that plenty of people in the USA have 'bitter experiences' to draw on, as anyone who knows anything about this history of slavery in the USA (and especially the phenomena of the 'show lynchings' of black people) would testify. Similarly, it might be argued that the extermination of tens of millions of indigenous Indian people during the 'American Holocaust' is another of the experiences of 'success' that has shaped the American psyche...

Stannard contends that the perpetrators of the American Holocaust drew on the same ideological wellspring as did the later architects of the Nazi Holocaust. It is an ideology that remains dangerously alive today, he adds, and one that in recent years has surfaced in American justifications for large-scale military intervention in Southeast Asia and the Middle East.

http://www.oupcanada.com/catalog/9780195085570.html

lucybears

That spaniard is sniping again ! Just read this interview
http://www.biciciclismo.com/cas/site/no ... p?id=21440
I;m just so glad that Lance doesn't resort to those tactics....

ZachReylo

Echo et les Boniments wrote:

Good ol' script-flippin' Lance: looks like he's got a great future as a politician.

Haha..! I've always said I could really see Armstrong running for governor of Texas one day.

The Prodigy

lucybears wrote:

That spaniard is sniping again ! Just read this interview
http://www.biciciclismo.com/cas/site/no ... p?id=21440
I;m just so glad that Lance doesn't resort to those tactics....

He's a nasty piece of work, it's all Lance, Lance, Lance with that guy. Tell us about the team or something

lucybears

The team player has landed !

"Lance Armstrong's private jet has touched down at Adelaide Airport, just days ahead of the Santos Tour Down Under.

The plane landed about 4.55pm.

The rest of Armstrong's teammates, from Team Radioshack, are due to arrive on a commercial flight tomorrow morning."

blazing_saddles

Wot? Didn't he even give Levi a lift? The guy could certainly use one. :P

As for the servants....sorry, domestiques.... economy or baggage?

There is an "i" in private jet.

moray_gub

lucybears wrote:

The team player has landed !

"Lance Armstrong's private jet has touched down at Adelaide Airport, just days ahead of the Santos Tour Down Under.

The plane landed about 4.55pm.

The rest of Armstrong's teammates, from Team Radioshack, are due to arrive on a commercial flight tomorrow morning."

For somoene who hasnt got much time for LA you sure spend a lot of time fussing and fretting about what he says and what he does.

Gazzetta67

Lucybears - Are you shocked MorayGub has stuck up for his Buddy Lance again ?

Dont you feel it`s quite touching his luv for Lance - I bet he goes to bed at night thinking thats me told of all those nasty people who dare to question the "Texan Messiah" thats when he`s not hanging posters in his Lance shrine. - Funny how the "Team Player" has changed his tune from helping levi & Kloeden to " I wanna win the tour again" - Me me me me me I wont play unless i get to win nah nah nee nah naaaaaaaaaa.

dulldave

Moray Gub wrote:

lucybears wrote:

The team player has landed !

"Lance Armstrong's private jet has touched down at Adelaide Airport, just days ahead of the Santos Tour Down Under.

The plane landed about 4.55pm.

The rest of Armstrong's teammates, from Team Radioshack, are due to arrive on a commercial flight tomorrow morning."

For somoene who hasnt got much time for LA you sure spend a lot of time fussing and fretting about what he says and what he does.

Probably because it's funny. I certainly thought it was. When you're a cycling fan Lance stories appear in front of you rather than needing to be searched for.

dennisn

Moray Gub wrote:

lucybears wrote:

The team player has landed !

"Lance Armstrong's private jet has touched down at Adelaide Airport, just days ahead of the Santos Tour Down Under.

The plane landed about 4.55pm.

The rest of Armstrong's teammates, from Team Radioshack, are due to arrive on a commercial flight tomorrow morning."

For somoene who hasnt got much time for LA you sure spend a lot of time fussing and fretting about what he says and what he does.

Got to agree with you MG. Almost all the Lance threads are started by people who dislike him, with the rest of the "dislikers" piling on once it's started. I would challenge anyone to find a thread started by a Lance "fan boy". Should be at least a hundred or so, as some people claim that there are millions of these "deluded fan boys" out there. But I'm betting that most of the threads are started by the "anti fan boy club". Hey, I like that name.

dennisn

lucybears wrote:

The team player has landed !

"Lance Armstrong's private jet has touched down at Adelaide Airport, just days ahead of the Santos Tour Down Under.

The plane landed about 4.55pm.

The rest of Armstrong's teammates, from Team Radioshack, are due to arrive on a commercial flight tomorrow morning."

Real question. Did it ever occur to you that maybe, just maybe, there might have been different schedule requirements for....... Ah, forget it. Of course it didn't. You only see what you want to see.

iainf72

dennisn wrote:

Real question. Did it ever occur to you that maybe, just maybe, there might have been different schedule requirements for....... Ah, forget it. Of course it didn't. You only see what you want to see.

He just wanted to use his new toy

Armstrong flew in to Adelaide yesterday on his new private jet, which has the tail number N7LA (7 for his seven Tour wins and ''LA'' his initials). The 38-year-old said he was in better form than last year, when he placed 29th overall in his first race after 3½ years ou

rockmount

dennisn wrote:

Got to agree with you MG. Almost all the Lance threads are started by people who dislike him, with the rest of the "dislikers" piling on once it's started. I would challenge anyone to find a thread started by a Lance "fan boy". Should be at least a hundred or so, as some people claim that there are millions of these "deluded fan boys" out there. But I'm betting that most of the threads are started by the "anti fan boy club". Hey, I like that name.

17 pages on ... and it's Lance that should let it go ... hilarious !

dennisn

rockmount wrote:

dennisn wrote:

Got to agree with you MG. Almost all the Lance threads are started by people who dislike him, with the rest of the "dislikers" piling on once it's started. I would challenge anyone to find a thread started by a Lance "fan boy". Should be at least a hundred or so, as some people claim that there are millions of these "deluded fan boys" out there. But I'm betting that most of the threads are started by the "anti fan boy club". Hey, I like that name.

17 pages on ... and it's Lance that should let it go ... hilarious !

I'm not even sure what he, they, or us should let go of anymore. :oops: :oops: :oops:

lucybears

Gazzetta67 wrote:

Lucybears - Are you shocked MorayGub has stuck up for his Buddy Lance again ?

Shocked ? Nah , not even at how little bait was needed....

moray_gub

dulldave wrote:

Moray Gub wrote:

lucybears wrote:

The team player has landed !

"Lance Armstrong's private jet has touched down at Adelaide Airport, just days ahead of the Santos Tour Down Under.

The plane landed about 4.55pm.

The rest of Armstrong's teammates, from Team Radioshack, are due to arrive on a commercial flight tomorrow morning."

For somoene who hasnt got much time for LA you sure spend a lot of time fussing and fretting about what he says and what he does.

Probably because it's funny. I certainly thought it was. When you're a cycling fan Lance stories appear in front of you rather than needing to be searched for.

You thought it was funny that a multi millionaire sportsman used a private jet ? what as in funny ha ha or funny peculiar ?

moray_gub

lucybears wrote:

Gazzetta67 wrote:

Lucybears - Are you shocked MorayGub has stuck up for his Buddy Lance again ?

Shocked ? Nah , not even at how little bait was needed....

The post was not about LA though it was about Lucybears and her obsession with someone she clearly dislikes.

moray_gub

dennisn wrote:

Moray Gub wrote:

lucybears wrote:

The team player has landed !

"Lance Armstrong's private jet has touched down at Adelaide Airport, just days ahead of the Santos Tour Down Under.

The plane landed about 4.55pm.

The rest of Armstrong's teammates, from Team Radioshack, are due to arrive on a commercial flight tomorrow morning."

For somoene who hasnt got much time for LA you sure spend a lot of time fussing and fretting about what he says and what he does.

Got to agree with you MG. Almost all the Lance threads are started by people who dislike him, with the rest of the "dislikers" piling on once it's started. I would challenge anyone to find a thread started by a Lance "fan boy". Should be at least a hundred or so, as some people claim that there are millions of these "deluded fan boys" out there. But I'm betting that most of the threads are started by the "anti fan boy club". Hey, I like that name.

Spot on if wasnt for the ALB this forum would have very few LA threads.

blazing_saddles

A private jet: Just the sort of thing to get away from it all. :roll:

If it wasn't for the ALB, there would still be countless threads on Lance, but all containing the same thing.
Huge man crush worshiping material.
Not really the stuff of a good verbal MG joust.

lucybears

dennisn wrote:

Real question. Did it ever occur to you that maybe, just maybe, there might have been different schedule requirements for....... Ah, forget it. Of course it didn't. You only see what you want to see.

Of course it did. It also occurred to me that maybe, just maybe, there might have been different schedule requirements that prevented LA from attending his team mate Alberto Contador's celebration dinner in Paris......

moray_gub

Blazing Saddles wrote:

A private jet: Just the sort of thing to get away from it all. :roll:

If it wasn't for the ALB, there would still be countless threads on Lance, but all containing the same thing.
Huge man crush worshiping material.
Not really the stuff of a good verbal MG joust.

I can recall few threads like that, thats a bit of a smokescreen to be honest.

dennisn

lucybears wrote:

dennisn wrote:

Real question. Did it ever occur to you that maybe, just maybe, there might have been different schedule requirements for....... Ah, forget it. Of course it didn't. You only see what you want to see.

Of course it did. It also occurred to me that maybe, just maybe, there might have been different schedule requirements that prevented LA from attending his team mate Alberto Contador's celebration dinner in Paris......

Maybe, just maybe that's what happened. But I tend to believe that maybe, just maybe
neither you or I have a clue about either. In other words, you see what you want to see
and then claim thats how it was.