From: Steve Drew (sd014a6399@blueyonder.co.uk)
Date: Mon 18 Nov 2002 - 01:13:20 GMT
Hi Joe
> Date: Sun, 17 Nov 2002 18:31:41 -0600
> From: joedees@bellsouth.net
> Subject: Re: Why Europe is so Contrary
>
>> Joe,
>>
>> You have written many interesting things in the past, but this ain't
>> one of them.
>>
> I didn't write it; it is an article I posted to the list to make a salient
> point
> about memetic motivations for differing opinions.
My apologies. Did seem out of character.
>>
>> The world is not and never has been black and white, good
>> and evil etc. I support the right of a woman to an abortion so the
>> Fundies would call me evil? Is there a moral system that says what
>> EXACTLY is good and evil 'cos I haven't seen it so far.
>>
> Murder is evil. Rape is evil. Theft is evil. Lying is evil. There are
> notable exceptions, of course, but, as Aristotle said, the exception
> PROBES the rule, since its status as an exception sets the parameters
> of the rule's scope (it is a common misquote to say that the exception
> proVes the rule).
Agreed, but as you say there are exceptions that probes the rules. If you
could have killed Hitler at: 10 years, 20 years, aborted him if you had the
knowledge of what was to come. It would be murder.
Lying I would suggest is not evil as such, but what the lie is hiding. Lying
to some one you love, a friend etc, may, in the long term be more beneficial
than telling the truth.
>>
>> I have not seen any convincing reason to attack Iraq except the one to
>> free the Iraqi people which is, to my mind, low on the list of the US.
>> Weapons of mass destruction. Don't make me laugh. My guess is that
>> people
>> on this list could make some nasty shit just by looking in a chemistry
>> text book. Look at the Tokyo sarin attack. An Horizon (BBC tv)
>> documentary in the seventies got a grad student to use public archives
>> to design a nuclear weapon - how many physics grads are around today
>> and are any of them muslim.?
>>
> But when a nation commanding tens of milllions of people and billions
> of petrodollars cranks out the shit by the ton, we are talking about an
> entirely different level of threat.
Which is? They can lob a missile a few thousand miles. Al Queda, box cutters
and some planning brought down the WTC for a lot less cash.
>>
>> Just because people don't toe the Yankee line doesn't make them wrong.
>> If we had followed your lead at the start of WWII, Europe language
>> would be German. But then America only got its shit together when it
>> was attacked at Pearl harbour and realised there was some evil
>> bastards about. Took 9/11 to wake you up again.
>>
>> No I do not hate America as there is plenty you can teach the world
>> about democracy etc, just remember that the USA may not have all the
>> answers.
>>
> But the US has some of them, and in some cases can even persuade
> the UN to consider unpalatable truths.
Fair enough. But will the US listen also listen when others speak?
>>
>> I read a report recently that Iraqi oil deposits are the most
>> extensive in the world. Or am I being cynical?
>>
> You're being cynical. The Saudi reserves are more than twice the Iraqi
> ones.
But oil is oil. And the Saudis are only the US's "bastards" for now
>>
>> Does GW Bush intend to do anything about the Saudi's promotion of the
>> fundamentalist Wahabi (excuse the spelling) interpretation of Islam
>> that was responsible for producing Bin Laden? Or for paying for Al
>> Queda? - I won't hold my breath.
>>
> I' too would like to see remedial action taken there.
Good, so we shall see the US sponsoring a motion in the UN to bring down the
Saudi Regime? :-)
>>
>> And as some one said earlier, I would prefer to die fighting rather
>> than push my head in the dirt to pray to a non existant god.
>>
> Yepperz.
The meme of religion is not welcome here :-)
Regards
Steve
>>
>> Regards
>>
>> Steve
>>
>>> Date: Sun, 17 Nov 2002 00:32:53 -0600
>>> From: joedees@bellsouth.net
>>> Subject: Why Europe is so Contrary
>>>
>>> On the dark side: The fear factor
>>>
>>> "Strong, the pull of the Dark Side is." -- Yoda
>>>
>>> Nations once feared to oppose Soviet might. Today they fear
>>> opposing Islamic might. They fear opposing terrorism. They fear
>>> opposing Iraq. So George W. Bush had to try to shame the United
>>> Nations into doing so.
>>>
>>> Which makes him contemptible to them. For he exposes their
>>> cowardice. Every day that he shows no fear, he highlights theirs.
>>>
>>> Evil always seems more formidable than does good. Some even
>>> scoff at the very notion of its existence, subconsciously
>>> preempting accusations that they might be enabling or siding with
>>> any such thing. If one doesn't delineate the world in terms of good
>>> and evil, one never has to admit that he is supporting the wrong
>>> camp, or why. Fear is masked, and the hunt to collect moral
>>> justification for one's position commences.
>>>
>>> "We now have a president who thinks in terms of good and evil,"
>>> balks actor Sean Penn.
>>>
>>> Artists. Many of them have been expressing this sentiment in
>>> recent months. Evil is such an alien concept to this sensitive sort
>>> that when it slaps them across the face, a defense mechanism kicks
>>> in and reaches for an explanation, for a rationale to the
>>> irrational.
>>>
>>> To Mr. Penn there is no such thing as clear-cut evil. It's been the
>>> foundation of storytelling over the centuries, but the actor has
>>> declared the centuries outmoded. Millennia of tales, and none of
>>> them rooted in reality. Good guy-bad guy. Hero-villain.
>>>
>>> These timeless concepts must have originated from thin air, with no
>>> real-life models. The one example an artist will have at the ready,
>>> as though it's history's first and last, is Adolf Hitler. Yet
>>> today's Hitler isn't so easily defined. Political correctness has
>>> obscured truth from lie, has made wrong appear right and has
>>> justified evil, confusing contemporary generations.
>>>
>>> The late Russian-American novelist Mark Aldanov had an insight
>>> into the subconscious motivation of those who obscure good and
>>> bad: Whom would one feel safer having as one's enemy? he asked. The
>>> side without standards or scruples, or the side governed by
>>> morality, which doesn't kill easily but exercises judiciousness and
>>> restraint?
>>>
>>> Today's cowards, even if they know in their gut that the Islamic
>>> world is in the wrong, are scared to oppose it, for they know it has
>>> no internal checks on its behavior. So if crossing to the dark side
>>> will prolong their lives by a single day, they will buy time on
>>> evil's good side.
>>>
>>> Even from the microcosmic view of a single college campus, a
>>> student may fear his Arabic peers and will sooner rail against the
>>> campus's pro-Israeli forces, since he is less likely to get beat up
>>> by Jewish students
>>>
>>> The international community adopts a similar approach to the
>>> Middle East. After all, who is easier to condemn--Arabs or Jews? And
>>> so the pressure always falls on the latter. Especially since
>>> everyone knows that their conduct is generally guided by principles
>>> of humanity, morality, honesty, compassion and justice.
>>>
>>> Or else the photojournalism coming from the region would look
>>> entirely different from what it has been so far. We wouldn't see
>>> pictures of militants captured by the Israeli army being fed water
>>> by Israeli soldiers. We wouldn't see photographs of Palestinian
>>> schoolgirls chatting carefree as they walk past Israeli soldiers. We
>>> wouldn't have seen a photograph of a Palestinian man perched on a
>>> low ledge, casually observing machine-gun-wielding Israeli soldiers
>>> in the middle of a gun battle with militants as the soldiers
>>> practically brush by his dangling legs.
>>>
>>> Nor would there be PBS footage of Palestinian women coming
>>> out from inside militants' homes during a raid, fearlessly mouthing
>>> off at the soldiers conducting it. Nor would there be 1.3 million
>>> Arab Israelis.
>>>
>>> But to the UN, charged with promoting world peace, the Middle
>>> East serves as a constant reminder of its failed mission. As long as
>>> there is fighting, it reflects badly on them. The path of least
>>> resistance becomes tempting. If it leads to the extinction of one
>>> people over the other, that's one way to solve the problem-- without
>>> the UN ever directly involving itself in the bloodshed.
>>>
>>> The international community doesn't do what's right. It does
>>> what's easier. Who has time to actually sift through the facts,
>>> especially when that could lead to taking the path of greater
>>> resistance?
>>>
>>> It's far easier to do what is popularly perceived as the right
>>> thing. On an individual level, this is driven by a desire for
>>> blamelessness and acceptance. One will never have to defend being
>>> "for peace" or be asked to explain the statement "the Palestinians
>>> are an occupied people." Humanitarianism is a seductive identity to
>>> take on, and there's a lot of ego in doing so. If one doesn't
>>> understand and doesn't care to understand the complexities--which
>>> are often simpler than those he must layer on to justify his
>>> position--one appears to be humane and enlightened and can go
>>> through life more expediently.
>>>
>>> It is likewise ego that drives European countries to dissent from
>>> major U.S.-led efforts. Europe, itself essentially a Muslim country
>>> (yes, country), acts like something between a teenager trying to
>>> assert his independence and a wishy-washy third party waiting out
>>> the escalating conflict in order to align itself with whichever side
>>> seems more likely to win, whether right or wrong. So Europeans stand
>>> up to American might rather than Islamic might. What courage, after
>>> all, does it take to oppose America? America isn't going to
>>> terrorize them.
>>>
>>> The internationals should note, however, that in traditional story
>>> lines good trumps evil. They should also respect history enough to
>>> know that committing to the dark side rarely scores any long-term
>>> points with it.
>>>
>>> But the UN just may go along with the U.S. on this one--on Iraq. So
>>> that its member states can pretend they're good for something. And,
>>> no doubt, so they can later pressure the U.S. to pony up for
>>> building renovations. There has to be a payoff, after all. Doing the
>>> right thing alone isn't enough.
>>>
>>> Which is proof that calls for coalitions, resolutions and other
>>> forms of international blessings are meant to obscure the obvious
>>> fact that America could do a far better job of governing the world
>>> single-handedly than in collaboration with the world. So as Bush
>>> finishes his father's work in Iraq, moves to undo Carter's handiwork
>>> in Iran, digs out from under Clinton's work everywhere and continues
>>> Reagan's work everywhere, he proves that getting one's hands dirty
>>> pursuing what is right is far less evil than keeping one's hands
>>> clean enabling the spread of what is wrong.
>>
===============================================================
This was distributed via the memetics list associated with the
Journal of Memetics - Evolutionary Models of Information Transmission
For information about the journal and the list (e.g. unsubscribing)
see: http://www.cpm.mmu.ac.uk/jom-emit
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Mon 18 Nov 2002 - 01:16:57 GMT