To your last point of presenting a narative, rather then the truth as one can 
best identify, then Stone, as in his past films engages in propaganda. To your 
previous concept that the US terrorizes innocent third world countries to 
establish itself as the "last empire" I would instead train your awareness on 
how, for example, the Chinese behave when, for example, they have taken over 
Tibet. Tibet is a land which historically has little connections to China. If 
you'd care to consider how China behaves in regards to Vietnam, Phillipines, 
and Japan, in the current tiff over various islands and territories, and 
regions, you might reconsider your statement on America being the last empire. 
Your "anti-war" stance, it seems is not really anti-war, but simply American 
use of violence in particular. Calling myself a nice guy, doesn't axiomatically 
make me one. 



-----Original Message-----
From: Craig Weinberg <whatsons...@gmail.com>
To: everything-list <everything-list@googlegroups.com>
Sent: Sun, Dec 16, 2012 3:42 pm
Subject: Re: Progressives and social darwinism




On Sunday, December 16, 2012 3:19:54 PM UTC-5, spudb...@aol.com wrote:
The assumption here is that Oliver Stone is presenting verifiable history, 
rather then his own, Neo-marxist "Theory" of history. That the Third World (an 
invented word of the Left) is deserving of deep respect, and is presumed 
blameless in all things, as well. I notice the avoidance of blaming Islamists 
for jihad actions in the world, or do you feel we should have sued the Afghan 
government in the Hague, rather then invade? Secondly, in Afghanistan, should 
we have allowed the Soviets to remain unchallenged during their involvement 
there? Another element of the neo-Marxist is to avoid speaking to Soviet 
actions in the world that was. 


It just depends what we want to do. If we want to try to be the last empire on 
Earth, then we should continue lying, cheating, and bombing the most 
territories that we can into submission and hold on to it as long as we can. If 
we do that, the current trend of degradation and corruption will likely be 
amplified and we will go the way of all failed civilizations. If we took 
another route and rolled back the empire, then we would have a lot of intense 
social dislocation and readjustment but ultimately maybe have a chance of 
joining the rest of the world as an equal partner nation.

If you know of anything that Stone is presenting that is false I would be 
interested in hearing what that is. While he is obviously presenting his 
narrative of what happened, he makes no secret of it. I don't think that any of 
the events he depicts are in dispute. I will say that he de-emphasizes the 
transgressions which do not support his narrative, but it is ridiculous to say 
that these Neolithic-hut dwelling people did something to deserve being invaded 
and destabilized by American black ops.

Craig





-----Original Message-----
From: Craig Weinberg <whats...@gmail.com>
To: everything-list <everyth...@googlegroups.com>
Sent: Sun, Dec 16, 2012 3:05 pm
Subject: Re: Progressives and social darwinism




On Sunday, December 16, 2012 2:47:54 PM UTC-5, Stephen Paul King wrote: 

On 12/16/2012 1:42 PM, meekerdb wrote:

On 12/15/2012 10:20 PM, Stephen P. King wrote: 
  I guess preventing women from learning to read is good in Afghanistan, even 
though it's bad here.  So it's rational when you agree with the conclusion and 
rationalization when you don't.

Brent

    No, it is not! Where are people in power in the US preventing women from 
learning to read in the US? What "Power" is needs to be precisely defined. 
Arguments from unreal hypotheticals are always fallacious.


What hypothetical??  Women ARE prevented from learning to read in Afghanistan 
and we DO think it would be a bad thing to keep women from learning to read 
here.

Brent
-- 



    Is the average US citizen the cause of the actions of the average Teleban 
member in Afghanistan? What is the relation between some activity in 
Afghanistan and in "somewhere we are". This is an equivocation, thus a rubbish 
argument.



Eh, there is a direct relation. After WW.II, The US and other world powers have 
been playing Chess with the Third World. Toppling democracies, installing 
puppet regimes. That's pretty much the CIAs function. The actual history is 
interesting.. the Oliver Stone series on Showtime right now is pretty 
informative. Why were we messing with the governments if Iran, Guatemala, 
Indonesia, Vietnam, Congo, Afghanistan? Why did the average citizens of those 
countries pose a threat to the oil companies and agribusiness?

Craig





-- 
nward!
Stephen


-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/everything-list/-/LAjAocngmYgJ.
To post to this group, send email to everyth...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to everything-li...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.



-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/everything-list/-/UbNn8FxTdhkJ.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.

Reply via email to