Re: Why Europe is so Contrary

From: joedees@bellsouth.net
Date: Mon 18 Nov 2002 - 02:23:10 GMT

  • Next message: Jeremy Bradley: "Re: The terrorism meme"

    > 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.
    >
    And those are the exceptions, possible or not, that probe the rules. It is reasonable from one point of view to protect someone that one loves. On the other hand, if one truly loves this person, they should also trust them to be able to deal with the truth, for one of the reasons you would respect them would be because they desired knowledge of the truth in general. The first is impossible; i.e. the future is a combination of plan and mystery, so since the ability to foreknow is an impossible hypothetical, the situation could not come up. However, if it did, and was an actual situation, rather than erroneously perceived (but how would one ascertain that?) one would be strongly swayed by purely utilitarian concerns (the greatest good for the greatest number) to kill the few to spare the many. One would have to make an irrational leap of faith in such circumstances, but evidence provides the decisive fulcrum for one's decision. In the absence of such evidence, however, one should not murder on the basis of ungrounded supposition.
    > >>
    > >> 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.
    >
    A ship could be cruised into a coastal harbor of any one of a number of the US's port megalopolises and detonated; any number of weapons could arrive via cargo container or smuggled aross the US's lengthy borders.
    > >>
    > >> 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?
    >
    The US already has. It listened to Europe's plea with regard to the Balkans. In other such situations, we will continue to serve our purpose, and your purpose for us as well (to prevent fascist totalitarianism from once again rearing its ugly head in Europe or its delicate underbelly).
    > >>
    > >> 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
    >
    The US has indeed been diversifying, into Mexican and Venezuelan oil in the Western Hemisphere, and into West Central African oil across the Atlantic. And the Soviet reserves at Baku are certain to eventually come into their own as blackmail armor.
    >
    > >> >> 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? :-)
    >
    That ain't gonna happen any time soon, because the Saudis continue to aid the US just enough to force it to ignore the actions that they or their citizens are simultaneously taking against them.
    >
    > >> >> 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 :-)
    >
    Yu Betcha! :~)
    >
    > Regards
    >
    > Steve
    >
    Likewise, Joe

    =============================================================== 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 - 02:26:04 GMT