It did have a context. Do you think everyone should read several books on Roswell before dismissing it as a fantasy? Reading up on Libya presents the same problem. Prima facie u.s. military action is unacceptable. Arguments on a given case are irrelevant until the legitimacy of arguing that particular c ase is established. This is both ordinary common sense and standard procedure of all intellectuals. Defenders of u.s. war crimes in Libya have to first establish that u.s. good faith can be assumed. Chomsky (a great fact man) exploded that long ago.
No one on this list knows the factual details of the leadership of the rebels. They should establish that before they say a word on anything else -- or at least quit pretending that _their_ case is grounded in knowing the facts. That is a serious delusion. We never know all the necessary facts on anything, and therefore have to resort to some principle to judge that our little pile of facts constitutes the correct sdelection of fats. I'll stop herewith a prediction. Within three years it will be obvious that NATO intervention will have caused enormous misery, and that it was based on false information. Defenders of this criminal invasion will then say, "When the facts change I change my mind." Pish. We _know_ from a hundred years experience what u.s. defense of democracy abroad means. It has _never_ meant democracy except in some limited fashion that is consistent with u.s. interests. But it is dishonest to quote a fragment of what I have written on another list without providing not only the full textg of that post but of any other relevant posts. The argument is not about facts: only an idiot would claim that. It isabout the interpretation we give of a small and inadequarte collection of facts. Those who claim their position is based on facts are either dishonest or or intellectually challenged. Carrol -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Jim Devine Sent: Monday, March 28, 2011 10:36 PM To: Progressive Economics Subject: Re: [Pen-l] from Juan Cole: An Open Letter to the Left on Libya > As Carrol said earlier today on lbo-talk: "I see no reason to waste time studying alleged 'facts.'" who was it who said "don't confuse me with facts"? Was it Sergeant Schultz? -- Jim Devine / "Segui il tuo corso, e lascia dir le genti." (Go your own way and let people talk.) -- Karl, paraphrasing Dante. _______________________________________________ pen-l mailing list [email protected] https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l _______________________________________________ pen-l mailing list [email protected] https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l
