From: Van oost Kenneth (kennethvanoost@belgacom.net)
Date: Mon 09 Dec 2002 - 16:16:12 GMT
Joe,
> I should hope that freedom, equality, basic human rights and
> representative government are 'politically correct'; I see politics, in
its purest and most idealistic form, as the effort to maximize these ideals,
> in the real world, for all citizens. Politics is not perfect, or even in
> principle perfectible (since available choices, and therefore the
> definition of freedom, constantly expand), but I see these goals as ones
> that responsible governments should always keep in mind when
> formulating policy.
>> Yes, of course, but you can be so political correct that in order to be
that way you deny people to choose freely. That is what I meant with my
argument that the Iraqi people would not have the chance to choose freely
the constitution they want to live under.
It is IMO, an illusion to think that this kind of compelment is a real
democratic trait. You have atleast to admit that within your in principle
perfectly attempt to give all citizins freedom and democraties some, and in
many cases, all your attempts will fail_ atleast in the short run !
My take on this, following Havel is the next, each citizin, American, Iraqi
or any one other, is in the same time victim and carrier of the political/
cultural/ social and/ or religious system in which he/ she lives.
After the US will have freed the Iraqi people from slavery the US will be
confronted with a people with a degenerated morality, with a people that is
used to say something else than what they think, with a people who is
used to believe in nothing than but themselves_ but in a negative sense.
Individualistic responsibility will be the prior target for the US, not the
lay- outs for democracy...
Joe,
> It is forever assailed by the perpetual imperfection of reality, and its
> eternal failure to achive the ideals, but those very ideals, and the
> benefitsof even imperfectly realizing them, inspire further strivings,
even in the face of that perpetual imperfection, to asymptotically approach,
> as closely as possible, an ideal that can never in reality be completely
> achieved.
>>Agreed ! But will you account for the victims, the death of those people
who will loose their lives in the US its imperfect attempt to free them !?
The US have not to free the Iraqi people from slavery but also from a
memetic deathlock. Even you recon that your attempt will be imperfect
you can 't and will not do enough to comprehend the necessity for real
structural reform, not only political but also socially, religiously, meme-
tically ! IMO, the US, or any other country or institution isn't up to such
a task. I hope I do get it wrong here, but if we can 't compensate the loss
of individuality and identity the ' old ' structures will re- surface.
Joe,
> Yes, the Europeans, who owe much to us in the realm of ideas (as we
> undeniably owe much to them, and we all owe much to the Greeks),
> tend to look down their nose at the 'colonies' as if we were uncouth, ill-
> bred and ignorant barbarians.
>>That is how I, personaly don 't look at Americans, but like all Europeans
I suppose, except the Brits, but again what Havel said makes sense to me,
" there is no doubt something within the human being that comes up to the
exeptations of the [ political] system, something that comes to meet and
adapts, something that paralizes him to revolt.
That is why the system alienates not only the human being, but the alienated
humanity supports at the same time the system."
That is to say, that within the context of Europe is contrary to the US,
that each side works for and against it own degeneration.
If thus Europeans see the Americans like you describe them as above, a
certain amount of truth has to accompany this and vice versa of course.
Joe,
> One cannot lose sight of the real in pursuit of the ideal, because it is
the
> difference between the real and the ideal that is the object of one's
> strivings - to shrink it as much as is practically possible.
>> Hm, for one brief moment I gave you the credit to be right, but alas.
IMO, I think that the US lost sight of reality, or the real in pursuit of
the ideal.
Still, IMO, and again I use here Havel to demonstrate, there is something
both in the American individual as well within the Iraqi individual that
makes him " un- individualize " himself. The ideal is to be a part of "
one",
of " man ", of " they ", of " we ". The ideal to obtian freedom for all
citizins
made you blind for the fact that the efforts means ' un- freedom ' for
others
and for yourself !
I stand for authenticity ! And I cannot achieve this while one other is
trying to achieve his or its ideal....while thus one other is intervening
with
my attempt(s) even those are committed in the best interest for myself !
Joe,
> But freedom and equality and representative democracy and basic
> human rights are not mere brands, opposed by other equally feasible
> brands. Slavery and inequality and totalitarianism and rightless
> serfhood compete very poorly in the marketplace of ideas whenever the
> showroom is equally open to their alternatives.
>> The point to make here I suppose is to see if the doors are open 24 h
every day and that everybody has the equal right to enter freely!?
Intimidation and psychological oppression are more than brands to get
people out of the voting box.
The way by which Saddam controls the people is not only pierced thru'
the whole of Iraqi society but injured also the whole of the existention
of the and each individual.
In a sense, living in a free country under democratic ruling would be living
within an ' individualistic ' lie_ the conflict within each and every
individual
would have huge consequencies.
Joe,
> Well, actually, the US is grateful for any help that it is offered in such
> globally beneficial endeavors, and incessantly requests it, through the
> UN, NATO, the WTO, bilateral negotiations, and many other political
> and diplomatic means. When these things desperately need to be done
> for the good of all the world's peoples, it is not fair to not help the US
do them and then criticize that it is too much for them to do on their own.
>> I doubt very much the sincerity of the US policy in this particular case.
After Iraq handed over a 12. 000 pages containing rapport to satisfy the
worlds hunger for information the only respons the US got was ' we don 't
believe it ' ! Good show, guys !
The possible attack on Iraq is in that way not seen by the world as a des-
perately need to free it from Saddam, but more as a personal vendatta.
Not even considering that for once Iraq has good intentions, whatever
the reason may be, is denying that any diplomatic effort to solve the
problem has a possibility the succeed. The US wants war !
You ask why Europe is contrary and we hestitate with giving you support!?
Joe,
> Oh, Europe's time will come. Sooner or later the alligator you cynically
> feed will swivel its hungry jaws in your direction. We are both Dar-el-
> Harb, the world of war, and until we are assimilated into the Dar-el-
> Islam, the Islamofascist Ummah will grant us no peace. Now that the
> US has made itself a harder target, the fanatical fundamentalist zealots
> who memebotically attack all that has not been assimilated under their
> religious dogma's totalitarian thrall will find you to be easier meat to
> feed upon, and will turn their feasting eyes upon you soon enough.
> Europe's common cause, and common preservation, is with the US, and
> it would behoove both Europe and the US to cooperate in freedom's
> defence.
>> No doubtely so, but I exept that Europe won 't retaliate with bombing
Afghanistan or Iraq. It would surely ask for the US to help and so the
circle of violence will close on itself.
But, there is another strategy_ counting the death and doing nothing !
Nothing in the extent that we will respond with words, with economical
and political measures. No doubt that will bring nothing further on the
sleeve of solving the problem, but it would take the wind out of the sails
of those who oppose us. In the end, if they continue to attack us, we will
be forced to act, and I think we will be beastly as them, and even more.
Never corner a wounded animal....Christians to the core !( I am not !)
Joe,
> It is a dogma of One Truth, that cannot tolerate even the existence of
> others, that attacks us; the US has a government in which is enshrined
> a principle that is anathema to its assailants; the separation of Church
> and State.
>> I doubt that ! Maybe in principle yes, like over here in Belgium and
like in the rest of Europe but we all know that ain 't true !
In the US creatonism is the red shred under its society, even Bush allows
to give more money to schools and institutions who will teach creatonism
above the Darwinian doctrine. If you believe for a fact that within the US
church and state are separate things, believe again !
I don 't even believe that I, as the person I am, is separateble in that
context !
Many regards from a now freezin ' Belgium,
Kenneth
===============================================================
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 09 Dec 2002 - 16:01:14 GMT