ashw_justin Posted January 3, 2008 Share Posted January 3, 2008 Your moral equivalency is complete fucking bullshit.Moral equivalency? You seem to want to say that I am singing praises of former enemies. You mistake my refusal to assume that everything that we do as a country is good, for gushing sympathy towards the other side (whoever that happens to be at any given moment). Just because an enemy is bad, doesn't make us immune from making things worse. The only moral equivalency I'm advocating is that we look at our own actions through the same lens as we do others'. I don't see anyone interpreting casualties of the American Civil War as "the Americans killing their own people, a testament to the brutality of capitalist economic development." As is clearly demonstrated by the winners' history, all enemies and/or victims of the U.S. are automatically considered evil. While I'm willing to assume that in many to most cases it is justified, the one-sidedness of our self-propaganda is so consistent that the vilification of our enemies has long since lost any true meaning. The lay public are stricken with a myopia in which we don't actually know anything about the enemy except that they are the enemy, because a constant string of "evil, evil, bad, evil, terror" is exactly meaningless, especially when is expected. (Up in the ivory tower we call it a lack of dynamic range, or an informational entropy of zero.) As it turns out this is a desirable situation for a government that would like to minimize the scrutiny of its foreign affairs, since a public which knows little truth about its enemy is easy to manipulate into a frenzy of hatred, or whatever collective emotion is necessary given the strategy. (T - 8 posts before JayB accuses me of a being a wanna-be Chomsky fanboy, or something to that effect...) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KaskadskyjKozak Posted January 3, 2008 Share Posted January 3, 2008 As is clearly demonstrated by the winners' history, all enemies and/or victims of the U.S. are automatically considered evil. Wrong. Only some of them are considered evil. Are the Brits "evil", from whom we gained our independence and fought again in the war of 1812? Nope. The Spaniards or Mexicans whom we fought in the 19th century? Nope. How about the Indians - evil? Nope. The Nazis? The Japanese fascists? The commies? Hell yes! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JayB Posted January 3, 2008 Share Posted January 3, 2008 Your moral equivalency is complete fucking bullshit.Moral equivalency? You seem to want to say that I am singing praises of former enemies. You mistake my refusal to assume that everything that we do as a country is good, for gushing sympathy towards the other side (whoever that happens to be at any given moment). Just because an enemy is bad, doesn't make us immune from making things worse. The only moral equivalency I'm advocating is that we look at our own actions through the same lens as we do others'. I don't see anyone interpreting casualties of the American Civil War as "the Americans killing their own people, a testament to the brutality of capitalist economic development." As is clearly demonstrated by the winners' history, all enemies and/or victims of the U.S. are automatically considered evil. While I'm willing to assume that in many to most cases it is justified, the one-sidedness of our self-propaganda is so consistent that the vilification of our enemies has long since lost any true meaning. The lay public are stricken with a myopia in which we don't actually know anything about the enemy except that they are the enemy, because a constant string of "evil, evil, bad, evil, terror" is exactly meaningless, especially when is expected. (Up in the ivory tower we call it a lack of dynamic range, or an informational entropy of zero.) As it turns out this is a desirable situation for a government that would like to minimize the scrutiny of its foreign affairs, since a public which knows little truth about its enemy is easy to manipulate into a frenzy of hatred, or whatever collective emotion is necessary given the strategy. (T - 8 posts before JayB accuses me of a being a wanna-be Chomsky fanboy, or something to that effect...) I'd recommend actually acquainting yourself with the subject before tossing terms like "lay public" around when discussing a topic that's light years away from the subjects that constitute the sole basis of your education. Do you really think that the historical record is composed of exclusively American facts and commentaries? That people of all stripes - scholars, laymen, etc - who lived elsewhere, including those who lived under these regimes haven't rendered their own indictments of this system? That there's *any* sane moral framework in which one could look favorably upon the terror-famine in the Ukraine, the Great Leap Forward, the Cultural Revolution, etc? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
olyclimber Posted January 3, 2008 Author Share Posted January 3, 2008 Guns don't kill people. People kill people. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
archenemy Posted January 3, 2008 Share Posted January 3, 2008 As is clearly demonstrated by the winners' history, all enemies and/or victims of the U.S. are automatically considered evil. Wrong. Only some of them are considered evil. Are the Brits "evil", from whom we gained our independence and fought again in the war of 1812? Nope. The Spaniards or Mexicans whom we fought in the 19th century? Nope. How about the Indians - evil? Nope. The Nazis? The Japanese fascists? The commies? Hell yes! There is an interesting (albeit short) article in this week's Newsweek about the use of "evil" in defining groups of different polictical beliefs in the US. It doens't address the groups you are discussing here, but it might be an interesting point of view to look at. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
olyclimber Posted January 3, 2008 Author Share Posted January 3, 2008 one child development theory is not to call the child "bad" or "good", but rather assign such connotations to their actions instead. lol. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KaskadskyjKozak Posted January 3, 2008 Share Posted January 3, 2008 As is clearly demonstrated by the winners' history, all enemies and/or victims of the U.S. are automatically considered evil. Wrong. Only some of them are considered evil. Are the Brits "evil", from whom we gained our independence and fought again in the war of 1812? Nope. The Spaniards or Mexicans whom we fought in the 19th century? Nope. How about the Indians - evil? Nope. The Nazis? The Japanese fascists? The commies? Hell yes! There is an interesting (albeit short) article in this week's Newsweek about the use of "evil" in defining groups of different polictical beliefs in the US. It doens't address the groups you are discussing here, but it might be an interesting point of view to look at. Like pornography, I can't define evil, but I can identify it when I see it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
archenemy Posted January 3, 2008 Share Posted January 3, 2008 I like both of them as well. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ashw_justin Posted January 3, 2008 Share Posted January 3, 2008 I'd recommend actually acquainting yourself with the subject before tossing terms like "lay public" around when discussing a topic that's light years away from the subjects that constitute the sole basis of your education.Surely we could have something remotely similar to a democracy if the average voter were as educated as you suggest. Unfortunately, that you criticize me for invoking a lay public only supports my point. Supposing that I represent a reasonable expectation of the average historical education in this country, the public in general is far enough removed from the facts of history and politics that the remaining choices are skepticism or dogma. Now I will not concede utter ignorance as to the course of history, but I will admit a preference for rational doubt over blind political faith. Your references are well taken and I'm well aware that there are plenty of examples of indisputable atrocities by enemies of the U.S. There are also clear atrocities committed by the U.S. or its allies/subordinates that we are expected to support/excuse on the basis of a double-standard--US (The Good Guys) vs. Them (The Bad Guys). That the truth is not that simple is not being debated. It's not debated here because it's obvious; it's not debated in popular politics because it's "demoralizing." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ashw_justin Posted January 3, 2008 Share Posted January 3, 2008 As is clearly demonstrated by the winners' history, all enemies and/or victims of the U.S. are automatically considered evil. Wrong. Only some of them are considered evil. Are the Brits "evil", from whom we gained our independence and fought again in the war of 1812? Nope. The Spaniards or Mexicans whom we fought in the 19th century? Nope. How about the Indians - evil? Nope. They were all demonized and you know it. At least you should, since you speak as if you were a witness to these wars. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim Posted January 3, 2008 Share Posted January 3, 2008 Seems like the US has a strong propensity for remembering what we want to (Beat the Nazis!! which was good) and forgetting events that would be informative in making further foreign policy blunders. Helped put Saddamn in power - forgot! Ousted him - remember! Lied about going to war in Vietnam - forgot! Lied about going to war in Iraq - not even on the radar! Instituted coup in Chile, democratically elected president asassinated - way forgot! Starting the Spanish American War to increase our Empire, stomping on the Native Americans - good reasons were put forth for these events at the time, and the enemy vilified. 100 or 200 years later there is some perspective, but the same fear tactics are used now to justify. While we probably can't approach the numbers of the gulag, Mao's re-education programs, or the Nazi's brutal efficiencies, from a historcal context the US is not a moral leader. We talk the talk but have a consistent history of supporting brutal regimes, having the CIA muck around in the politics of other countries, war, and pillage all in the name of "National Interest". Intersting phrase that one - usually synonymous with some corporate interest. Gore Vidal has an interesting term - the U.S. of Amnesia. Reflecting our inability to remember even recent events against the politicos and media talking points. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tvashtarkatena Posted January 3, 2008 Share Posted January 3, 2008 Vespula circumejaculata 'jackdripperii' Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tvashtarkatena Posted January 3, 2008 Share Posted January 3, 2008 Only a few specimens remain. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tvashtarkatena Posted January 3, 2008 Share Posted January 3, 2008 Intellectual climate change takes its toll. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tvashtarkatena Posted January 3, 2008 Share Posted January 3, 2008 The fastest growing economy in the world is communist. This would not have been possible without centralized authority and the unprecedented construction of infrastructure it was able to execute without opposition. The perfect economic system is born. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KaskadskyjKozak Posted January 3, 2008 Share Posted January 3, 2008 They were all demonized and you know it. At least you should, since you speak as if you were a witness to these wars. Sorry, but you lose on that, and you know it. Whatever "demonization" has occurred in the past has been fully scrutinized, revised, analyzed, argued, and a modern consensus has emerged. In the case of Communism - the verdict is out. Again, I refer you to a book like "The Black Book of Communism". Read it, then come back and tell me Communism is not inherently evil - a victim of the "winner's" perspective and propaganda. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KaskadskyjKozak Posted January 3, 2008 Share Posted January 3, 2008 The fastest growing economy in the world is communist. This would not have been possible without centralized authority and the unprecedented construction of infrastructure it was able to execute without opposition. The perfect economic system is born. Your true colors are revealed - as if your big "D" party affiliation and ACLU credentials were not enough. You'd have made a fine member of the nomenklatura, comrade. I'm sure there's room for you somewhere in China or Cuba. Why not get the fahq out of the US, and live where you'll be the most happy? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
olyclimber Posted January 3, 2008 Author Share Posted January 3, 2008 we got some real drama queens on this board Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tvashtarkatena Posted January 3, 2008 Share Posted January 3, 2008 (edited) The military is a form of collectivism with centralized authority, so I can understand why neither FW nor KKK, for all their flag waving, served their country in the armed forces. It would have been too ideologically painful. Edited January 3, 2008 by tvashtarkatena Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tvashtarkatena Posted January 3, 2008 Share Posted January 3, 2008 Cuba has the most pristine coral reefs in the world and it's music and culture need no introduction; it's on the top of my places to visit list. I'm not sure which way the barracuda and trigger fish lean politically, however. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KaskadskyjKozak Posted January 3, 2008 Share Posted January 3, 2008 The military is a form of collectivism with centralized authority, so I can understand why neither FW nor KKK, for all their flag waving, served their country in the armed forces. It would have been too ideologically painful. Non sequitor. Condemning an evil political ideology like Communism is hardly flag waving. It's a no-brainer. Yet you argue the opposite, and when you lose, well you go off into some tangent about flag waving. Clue-in, dick weed - nobody has said anything about the grand old USA in this thread, nor anything about military service. Nice try though. Maybe your martini-addled brain will figure out how to actually argue a point some day, and stick to it, but I doubt it, fatso. Stick with your posts on wasps and TRs on Tiger Mountain. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sexual_chocolate Posted January 3, 2008 Share Posted January 3, 2008 Yeah, Marxism is a laudable philosophy, which has only been twisted and "improperly" implemented. If only its noble goals could be realized in a perfect "instantiation" or "implementation". I've heard it all before from commie-sympathizing pukes such as yourself. Gee, is Nazism just "fascism" gone bad too? A bad "instantiation" of a legitimate philosophical form of government. You're a typical leftie fuck who will rationalize anything as long as it meets your anti-capitalist, America-hating, world view. Fuck off and die, pinko. Oh, and for the record, applying principles of a hard science, or tech career to real life - like history or politics, and theory of government, only shows a certain, ahem, ignorance and social retardation that is all too common from your ilk. Gee, let's construct a mathematical model, or scientific experiment, or misapply a concept in OO languages to explain forms of government and historical events. I laugh at you and fart in your general direction, comrade. Now instantiate this gesture: my middle finger right in your fat fucking face. that made me laugh. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sexual_chocolate Posted January 3, 2008 Share Posted January 3, 2008 The military is a form of collectivism with centralized authority, so I can understand why neither FW nor KKK, for all their flag waving, served their country in the armed forces. It would have been too ideologically painful. that's kinda funny too! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sexual_chocolate Posted January 3, 2008 Share Posted January 3, 2008 please continue. you are all here to entertain me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tvashtarkatena Posted January 3, 2008 Share Posted January 3, 2008 (edited) Yo pienso que hay demaciado protesta, Reyna Dramatica. Edited January 3, 2008 by tvashtarkatena Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.