Philip Winestone wrote:
Good points Ed.
As for the lack of parental control (and ultimately the lack of
self-control), I think I know what you're getting at; rules in some form
are very necessary, despite our dislike of people curtailing our
"freedom" (although the rules, in the case of "honour" killings (I like
to call them "ego killings") are decidedly less favourable toward women
than men).
In our case, the pendulum has swung far too far where permissiveness is
concerned... And I'll let it go at that!!!
As for the "water" analogy, that's a whole discussion in itself.
Briefly, I'm a great admirer of the Americans (I was born and educated
in Scotland and now live in Canada) because they essentially made their
own "water" as a nation; took risks and used their resourcefulness to
create the "water" they now have. But some (many) people are envious of
this water - without regard to the blood, sweat and tears that it took
to create it - and would like to either steal it or spill it on the
ground just to satisfy this envy.
Here is where we differ. Although envy is real and can motivate an
individual for good or ill, I do not think it can mobilize many people
and cause them to die for the idea. The root cause has to be a
universal feeling, like pride, fairness, justice or just plane old self
defense. Once these trip wires stir up the emotions, the other side
naturally finds all kinds of defects in their enemy to justify killing
them. We all see examples of great wealth in our countries, but very few
people are motivated to attack these people even if they could. On the
other hand, if a group attacks us, steals our livelihood, or treats us
like dirt, must people would be first in line to kill them. The West has
systematically done this to the Moslems nations over many years. For
example, we supported the Shaw of Iran even though he was a very
unpopular dictator. When he was thrown out by popular revolution, we did
everything we could to intervene. We even supported Iraq in the war
between Iran and Iraq. We treated the popular will of Iran like dirt. If
Mexico had done the same thing to us, there would have been war. I find
many people in the West can not believe our actions are not pure and
good. When other people object, we believe they must be doing this with
bad motives, which justifies our increased control. Of course, things
get out of hand, like a bar fight after a few punches are thrown. At
this point, being nice will not stop the fight. Only calling the cops
will work. But would it not be better to know how to keep a bar fight
from getting started in the first place? Most people know how prevent
pissing the other guy off. The US government has never learned this
because we were always the biggest guy in the bar. Now, the little guys
have learned how to gang up and hit us when our back is turned. Being
big no longer works.
Ed
P.
At 07:21 PM 8/14/2006 -0600, you wrote:
Philip Winestone wrote:
Tut Tut Ed... The problem is that you believe everyone thinks
rationally and quasi-legally like you do. Most don't.
Good point, Philip. Nevertheless, most people, except the insane, are
rational if the rules of the game are understood. For example, as you
note below, honor killing is very rational if the law is designed to
be implemented by the individual rather than by the state.
And as for: "A sane person does not try to murder his neighbor
because he thinks she is a slut. On the other hand, if, for example,
the neighbor takes all the water, treats you like dirt, and kills
your friends, you might think of murder."
You haven't heard of honour killings? More often than not they
murder their own offspring for that very reason. So we're talking
certain levels of sanity here.
Some societies are designed to be self policing. The father has the
right to control his children by any means he thinks necessary. If the
child can not be controlled or will not follow the rules, he/she can
be killed. I don't recommend this approach, but it works better than
our system seems to work in some cases.
And what if I deserve to be treated like dirt because... well...
perhaps I am dirt? Have you never experienced neighbours like that?
Some people just can't get their heads around quantum physics, so
they resort to... mayhem. And as dirt often associates with dirt...
well you get the picture...
Agreed, some people are just plain mean and irrational. We use the
state (courts or police) to control them. Some societies allow the
individual to take action. I have known occasions when I wished this
method was used more often here.
And the water? Well why does dirt (me, remember?) care so much about
water?
Water is a analogy for all that makes life possible. If you take my
"water" you make my life impossible and I have nothing to lose by
killing you.
Ed
P.
At 03:21 PM 8/14/2006 -0600, you wrote:
I don't believe they hate our freedom and our good life as we are
encouraged to believe.
They say they do! Have you read bin Laden speeches? You can see
what he has to say in books such as, "Imperial Hubris." He is the
most popular man in the Muslim world and millions of people have
named their sons after him and, so I think many people agree with
him. I think they are misguided. Millions of Japanese people agreed
with the militarists too. No doubt the majority of the country did,
even though it was pretty obvious after 1938 that they were
dragging the nation into Hell.
I think this conclusion is too simplistic. What they hate are
certain behaviors that are permitted by our society and our attitude
toward sex. Some Christians in the US have a similar problem with
these subjects, although they would not suggest the same solution.
However, I don't believe these reasons are the main driving force
for the movement. A sane person does not try to murder his neighbor
because he thinks she is a slut. On the other hand, if, for example,
the neighbor takes all the water, treats you like dirt, and kills
your friends, you might think of murder.
Ed
Of course it could. If the US had launched a massive World War II
style effort to fix the problem starting in 2001, oil would be
worth practically nothing today.
Yes, and if the government gave everyone 1 million dollars, we
would all be rich. But like this silly example, such things will
not be done and if they were, other worse consequences would result.
Such things were done in the past when the nation was in crisis. If
FDR or Lincoln were in charge, this and much more would be done
now. I mean immediately, within a week. They would impose a five
dollar emergency wartime gasoline tax, draft a million men & women
to fight the war in Afghanistan (which we are losing), and ban the
use of SUVs. If this is really a war, as the leaders claim, it is
their responsibility to do such things. Wars are never won by
half-measures. The nation would follow I am sure. As Lincoln put it:
"Will not the good people respond to a united, and earnest appeal
from us? Can we, can they, by any other means, so certainly, or so
speedily, assure these vital objects? We can succeed only by
concert. It is not 'can any of us imagine better?' but, 'can we all
do better?' The dogmas of the quiet past, are inadequate to the
stormy present. The occasion is piled high with difficulty, and we
must rise -- with the occasion. As our case is new, so we must
think anew, and act anew. We must disenthrall ourselves, and then
we shall save our country.
Fellow-citizens, we cannot escape history. We of this Congress and
this administration, will be remembered in spite of ourselves. No
personal significance, or insignificance, can spare one or another
of us. . . . We know how to save the Union. The world knows we do
know how to save it. We -- even we here -- hold the power, and bear
the responsibility. . . ."
http://showcase.netins.net/web/creative/lincoln/speeches/congress.htm
All of that applies as much to the energy/terror crisis today as it
did to the crisis of slavery in December 1862. Then and now, we
know what must be done. We need only summon up the will to *do* it.
And we may yet take action. Don't bet against it! You should never
sell the United States or its people short. The Japanese did in
1941 and look where it got them. Probably more than any other
people on earth, we are capable of doing extraordinary deeds in a
short time. As Edward Grey put it, the United States is like "a
gigantic boiler. Once the fire is lighted under it there is no
limit to the power it can generate."
The only thing we lack are leaders with guts & vision. Leaders who
are not afraid to demand sacrifices from everyone, not just army
volunteers. In the past, such people have often stepped forth when
they were needed. But it has always been a close call. Lincoln
nearly lost the election and FDR had great difficulty securing the
nomination. The people next in line who would have won if they had
lost would have led the nation into oblivion.
- Jed
