----- Original Message ----- From: "Nick Arnett" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Brin-L" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Wednesday, October 03, 2001 3:13 PM Subject: RE: T. Friedman editorial
> > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On > > Behalf Of Marvin Long, Jr. > > [snip} > > > And all of this has exactly *what* to do with anything I've said, or with > > what Friedman said? > > It had do with your suggestion that my criticism of Friedman meant that I > would "deny that in certain areas, we are a hell of a lot better than al > Qaeda and the Taliban, and those things are worth fighting to preserve." > That was unfair. I'm annoyed that my criticism of *Friedman* has been > characterized as criticism of the values he espouses and our nation... and > that I therefore must think our nation is inferior to the terrorists and we > shouldn't fight for it. Sheesh, saying it that plainly makes it sound > ridiculous. > > You tossed me into a box with those words, undeservedly. I was fighting > back against the very notion of putting people into such boxes. And I took > the opportunity to expand into criticism of Gautam's righteous-wing American > fundamentalism, an extreme example of tossing people into boxes, which you > should, indeed, not take personally... ;-) > Nick, no hard feelings, but even with your "no box" rhetoric, I would weigh you as doing more of the pigeonholing. From a theological point of view, I think your argument is a bit Calvinistic for my taste. As a Presbyterian elder, I shouldn't complain about that <grin>, but as a Catholic I can point out that Luther wasn't successful in getting James thrown out of scripture. BTW, the notion that justice will bring prosperity to a society and injustice will bring its downfall is one of the main themes of Kings, Chronicles, Isaiah, and Jeremiah. I don't think that Christian scriptures really argues against that. FWIW, I definitely think that Marvin's posts represents a much better handle on the intent of Friedman's article than your posts. The things that Friedman points to are good things. They are also a significant factor in the material well being of the US. Should we be doing more to help other people with the wealth we've accumulated? Absolutely. Should we be grateful for the privledge of being born into a place where we can be part of such a wonderful structure? Definitely. Do we need to be ashamed for amassing the wealth because it came from robbing workers elsewhere in the world? No. I'm sure you can point to US companies exploiting workers elsewhere, and being party to nasty stuff. I can too. But, the economy of the US is not dependant on that exploitation. It is dependant on improvements in productivity. Let me put it this way. If England were attacked physically, and one of the reasons given was that they were wealthy and spiritually bankrupt, would you really begrudge them taking stock of what they do right? Finding their footing, and what solid core values they have before going onwards? Some of that is extremely helpful, like pushing tolerance of Arab Americans and Muslims as part of the core values of the US, part of what makes this country great. Great doesn't mean perfect or without fault. But, just as Paul can be proud of what his friends in Philipi did, we can be proud of the good things people around us do. A positive self image need not be self righteousness. Indeed, wearing sack cloth and ashes all the time is a form of self righteousness too. It probably isn't what you are advocating, but many of your posts sound as though it is. Dan M.
