BARBELITH underground
 

Subcultural engagement for the 21st Century...
Barbelith is a new kind of community (find out more)...
You can login or register.


Bias and politics

 
 
Tryphena Absent
23:59 / 18.12.05
My name has been mentioned rather a lot in this thread and I think I thus have a right to defend myself against a number of rather large assumptions that have been made about me.

I might dislike the way Nina made her criticisms and then acknowledged that they were indefensible and that she doesn't care, they're true anyway*

Now this is a perfectly fine thing to say and indeed I have admitted that my words were lazy or rather in my writing in the thread that inspired this block of posts that seem to have got precisely nowhere I did not use the word "some." Quite how this would have clarified my position, which I outline below, is unclear to me.

I would argue that most people in the western world (where censorship is not rife and a good proportion of us have access to the tool that is the internet, I include people who could but don't) are complicit in the actions of our governments simply because we can find out what is going on and we do very little about it on a daily basis. There is a thread for activism in the Switchboard and the very fact that few barbelith members have posted to it suggests to me that there is not much activism going on with us. That I was specifically talking about the US, a country that frankly is engaging in abhorrent actions right now on a tremendous scale hardly means that I do not consider these things true of other countries and their populations as well. That this was assumed I think says as much about those who have assumed I would talk only about one country in that way as it does about my original post.

So am I biased against America? No. I am biased against capitalist-democracy. To compound my views on it in some simple words I think it is a load of bullshit. My boyfriend calls me a Leninist. Am I going to be polite about the whole crock of shit that is the political system in the USA, Britain and the various other countries around this world that are constantly attacking each other and the very nature of the planet? No because I personally judge that the situation frankly does not deserve a polite response. Could I think of anything to do that would contribute to the downfall of this horrendous, biased and unfortunate system I would do it. Unfortunately the people who agree with me tend to be members of the SWP an organisation that is primarily incoherent.

I think barbelith is disgustingly liberal on these issues. Any anti-American sentiment that is touted here is almost always directed at the administration currently in power. I do not feel that it is entirely accurate as the government was democratically elected and people who vote really should accept the blame for those they elect (clearly we do not have many Bush voters here so my thoughts on that specific element aren't really directed at anyone present. However I find it a bit rich not to blame that part of the electorate). I feel about as much sympathy for the population of the country as I feel for myself in these situations (as in the Blair government holding power) and that amounts to none because I am not behaving like Brian Haw who is bearing a load for a significant number of us who do not sacrifice ourselves for our beliefs. Does this stop me from criticising others? No, I can only accept that to an extent I too have been useless (and I have not sat idly at home either. Letters, money and a very large amount of time has been devoted to a number of causes on these issues).

I am lucky (please note the use of that word this time), as I have already pointed out, in that a number of people with actual authority have put a stop on schemes like 90 day detention in the UK. I would be a complete fucking moron if I didn't regard this as luck because I don't believe that the British population is any less ignorant than the American one. I do live in a country that systematically elected Maggie Thatcher, who despite a chorus of disbelief from some quarters, was indeed worse than Blair in the social policy put to her name.

I will not pretend that this does not all come across as a little arrogant but my political views are born of a great deal of logical thought over a long period of time. I believe in a cohesive system that protects people. I criticise America and the American population primarily because I believe that the system is cohesive but built on the opposite of protection of both its citizens and the larger world. When I look at the USA my communist soul shudders in horror. I see a country with a grossly outdated social infrastructure, a huge and largely unrecognised class divide as highlighted by the events in New Orleans earlier this year, a law that falls in favour of all weapons of destruction whether they are small handguns or nuclear weapons, no proper taxation and a non-existent environmental policy. The UK in contrast I view as a country that is not cohesive, that too often currently relies on those who were not elected to bar the way to terrible things.

In short everyone on barbelith may find it confirmed that I am biased against American policy and a significant proportion of the population of that country and that I am also biased against Britain and very probably every single country on this planet.
 
 
The Falcon
01:08 / 19.12.05
That policy thread, for quick reference.

I think yours is a not unreasonable response to series of appalling acts, Nina. I prefer not to think or write about these things terribly much because doing so generally leaves me in a state of utter impotent fury.
 
 
alas
02:30 / 19.12.05
The problem is the combined effect of wealth and a sense of invulnerability, I think. The US, in particular, even post-911 still feels essentially invulnerable. So we're basically, as F. Scott Fitzgerald described the shallow Buchanans in The Great Gatsby, "They were careless people, Tom and Daisy—they smashed up things and creatures and then retreated back into their money or their vast carelessness or whatever it was that kept them together, and let other people clean up the mess they had made . . . ."
 
 
alas
02:38 / 19.12.05
(Yes, that's probably overstated: amongst my dearest friends is an elderly Quaker who lives on less than $500 a month, she has a massive garden, she takes in boarders, she eats a frugal vegetarian diet, does not own a car, rides her bike everywhere, rarely leaves town, never flies, does not own a computer instead uses the library's computer...

But that's obviously not the normal routine of most Americans. It's not that most of us want to be 'careless' but the nation is, as a whole, careless, in terms of our national policies and in terms of the long-term implications of how we live, and structures things so that it's very hard for most of us to have the time, ability, or courage, to make truly intentional choices.

We are human, all too human. I kind of love our laziness--thank god, in some ways that we are not more efficient and "rational"--but we are dooming ourselves. We're like a massive ship heading straight for the shoals and, frankly, I'm not sure there's time to turn this ship around, the momentum is too big and all my actions tend to feel like I'm just re-arranging the deck chairs...)
 
 
electric monk
13:54 / 19.12.05
Thanks for starting this thread, Nina, and for going into more detail here. Not completely sure I want to comment on this, but I'm still a bit bewildered and a little put off by the statement (lazy or not) that started all this, and some of the things you have to say here as well.

I personally judge that the situation frankly does not deserve a polite response. Could I think of anything to do that would contribute to the downfall of this horrendous, biased and unfortunate system I would do it.

Agreed and agreed. The situation in the US is abhorrent, and IMHO responses to it need to be forceful and measured, but certainly not polite. However (and this is a partial quote): "I just want the country to evaporate", while forceful, is frankly distasteful in the same way the US policy toward, and treatment of, young Muslim men is. I realize you've since backed away from that statement, but I did want to register my thoughts on it.

I think barbelith is disgustingly liberal on these issues. Any anti-American sentiment that is touted here is almost always directed at the administration currently in power. I do not feel that it is entirely accurate as the government was democratically elected and people who vote really should accept the blame for those they elect...

No. The last election was far from democratic and there is a goodly amount of evidence to back that up. I suggest you start at:

http://www.blackboxvoting.org/.

Download the book PDFs (about halfway down the page on the right) and read them. Then ask me about my experience as a voter in Florida, and about a local story or two you may not have heard.

I grant you that it is an outrage that the US populace is not outraged by this. I wish I had more of an explanation than "media blackout" and "climate of fear", but it's all I have to offer. Salt to taste.

And from the Policy thread:

However politically I believe that actions speak louder than words, that is clearly coming across in my writing on this board and I don't see very much action from either those who represent themselves as left, liberals or from the Democratic party in the USA. This makes me think that US citizens are complying with what I regard as fascism...

I'm not sure you're coming at this with a full knowledge of the situation. Citizens of the US are not sitting idly by. Activism is alive and well here, with Cindy Sheehan and crew being the most visible example. There are others, like the Black Box Voting people. Recent polls suggest that around 60% of Americans distrust the president and think that the war in Iraq is wrong. There is very real worry among Republicans that the next round of elections in 2006 will not go their way, due to their previous support of the president and the war (and lingering questions about corruption and the voting process). That doesn't sound like complicity to me. And when you say I can only accept that to an extent I too have been useless (and I have not sat idly at home either. Letters, money and a very large amount of time has been devoted to a number of causes on these issues), I have to kinda shake my head a little and ask for clarification. Are the bulk of American citizens to be condemned for doing essentially the same things as you?

That's a great "Gatsby" quote, alas. Nice one.
 
 
Quantum
14:26 / 19.12.05
I am biased against American policy and a significant proportion of the population of that country and that I am also biased against Britain and very probably every single country on this planet.

Me too. An expansionist/imperial policy dominates the governments with the most power, determined to maintain a lifestyle that requires systematically denuding continents and enslaving people in order to provide the level of luxury people are used to. South America was colonised and stripped of it's vast natural resources, America was used up, and Africa, Australia, suddenly there are no unexplored resources to consume and yet we continue to live a lifestyle that will kill us all and poison our children. It's well known that the US uses 30% of the world's resources and constitutes 12% of it's population- if we all lived like that we'd need five Earths.
Everyone wants to live like that, and poorer countries are encouraged to embrace progress toward that unsustainable goal, and those protesting this obviously suicidal culture are marginalised and beaten up by policemen.

It's considered radical to propose extreme change. Right now extreme change is badly needed. This isn't politics, it's news.

So when Nina says she's against capitalist democracy, IMHO she is acting rationally on sound information in an atmosphere of misinformation and propaganda designed to make that view seem radical. My political views are quite (very?) different to hers, but on this particular point she's representing the only sane response to a mad situation.

(Nina, I hope I'm not misrepresenting your position with my ranting)
 
 
Quantum
14:34 / 19.12.05
my experience as a voter in Florida,

My sympathies are with you dude, I'd be blind with rage and probably in prison. I was angry enough with the election here in the UK, if I was a Floridian I'd be round Jeb's crib with one of those easily available firearms.
I heard gun control was lax in your neck of the woods, is it true you can buy bazookas and assault rifles over the counter? :-)
 
 
electric monk
14:58 / 19.12.05
Thanks.

OT

I'm not sure what Florida law says WRT gun sales. I know I've seen some heavy armaments for sale at gun shows here, but couldn't tell you what steps you'd need to follow to get, say, a .60 caliber machine gun with tripod and x-large clip. I do know that Florida recently passed a law essentially saying that a citizen carrying a concealed weapon is justified in shooting someone if they "feel threatened". Can't find any articles at the mo', but I'm sure they're out there. That may be what you're thinking of.

/OT

Ambling back to the topic:

So when Nina says she's against capitalist democracy, IMHO she is acting rationally on sound information in an atmosphere of misinformation and propaganda designed to make that view seem radical.

I think there's something to be said for a capitalist democracy wherein the checks and balances inherent in a democracy are working properly. In the abscence of those checks and balances tho...yes, I can understand the sound and the fury. Corporate and political power have, I think, combined in some very scary ways of late. Diebold, ES&S and Bush-Cheney '04 being Exhibit A, obv.
 
 
Tryphena Absent
15:20 / 19.12.05
Somewhere in the universe (if we're following the parallel timelines model) there has to be a type of democracy that really is ideal. I don't really believe that it's possible when matched up with capitalism though.

I hope I'm not misrepresenting your position with my ranting

No, I'd say you're spot on without perhaps my customary embellishment.
 
 
Evil Scientist
09:46 / 20.12.05
Somewhere in the universe (if we're following the parallel timelines model) there has to be a type of democracy that really is ideal.

It's the worst possible type of government...except for everything else.

But damn me, I can't remember for the life of me whose quote it is.

Your views are not necessarily mine Nina, but I do agree that a democratic society is complicit in the actions taken by it's government. However, lots of people didn't vote for Bush/Blair, they opposed their government's actions using methods within the law (ie demonstrations, etc), and are still citizens of the US/UK. I'm not sure that they should be considered in the same breath as those who invented "Shock and Awe!" and "40 minute" dossiers.
 
 
sleazenation
10:46 / 20.12.05
It's the worst possible type of government...except for everything else.

But damn me, I can't remember for the life of me whose quote it is.


I* believe it was Sir Winston Chruchill...
 
 
Jack Fear
11:06 / 20.12.05
Nina: I don't think the issue was ever with your particular personal politics per se—frankly, I don't give a tin shit about 'em—and moreso with your assertions that the US public is necessarily complicit in the crimes of the administration and previous administrations.

Which seems to me a curious and worrisome thing to say, and a broad brush at the top of a slippery slide.

Is the Israeli in the street complicit in the crimes undertaken for the sake of hir security? Is the Palestinian in the street complicit in the murders perpetrated in hir name?

Is everybody guilty? Is everyone complicit? Are there no innocents?

At the risk of being Godwintastic: Should we have hanged all the Germans at the end of World War II? The rise of fascism was preventable, and these people—these Germans—failed to prevent it. Were they all, then, complicit in the crimes of the Nazi regime? Your statement would seem to indicate yes. Even the Resistance is implicated, if only by their failure to resist effectively enough.

So what then? Kill 'em all, and let God sort 'em out?

Or are we perhaps indulging in the lamentable human tendency to blame the victim? Because, I would argue, you seem to be overlooking something: to wit, that the US public are victims in this as much as anybody else.
 
 
Tryphena Absent
12:40 / 20.12.05
I don't believe in God or capital punishment and I believe in response to a crime rather than a whitewash but yes I think the Germans in the early 20th century and the Israeli's now are complicit and to an extent responsible.

Is the Palestinian in the street complicit in the murders perpetrated in hir name?

This is more complicated- which particular murders are you talking about? If you support Hamas and the organisation then kills people then you're pretty much condoning it, aren't you? The same with all groups of terrorists or freedom fighters. I'd suspect that quite a lot of Palestinians are pretty in favour of Hamas (and who could blame them frankly) but that doesn't mean they're not at all responsible for the deaths of others.
 
 
Jack Fear
13:01 / 20.12.05
Ah, but what if you don't support Hamas? Hamas doesn't claim to be acting only on behalf if its supporters: it claims to be acting on behalf of "the Palestinian people."

Much as the American administration claims to be acting on the behalf of "the American people." For all our individual cries of "not in my name," are you saying that we're still all culpable, all complicit?
 
 
alas
14:15 / 20.12.05
Are there no innocents?

That's the key word for me, Jack, that puts a finger on why I disagree with your argument. Beyond perhaps very young children, "innocent" is a problematic word, and it's an even more problematic desire that Americans seem particularly prone to--speaking as an American.

America is always "losing its innocence." (The Kennedy assassination, Vietnam, 9/11... the list goes on). Given our cultural resources, we are woefully ignorant of history and world events. This ought to be a point of shame, but, by and large, we take our position of power in the world, which underwrites this ignorance, as a point of pride--"they're just jealous!" As a whole, we don't really give a fuck about the world. Let them learn English, and come pick our strawberries for us, if they're lucky.

Then, when things happen in the world that manage to break through our bubble, we seem always to be looking out in shock, shock!, that "people don't love us!" In fact, "some people seem to hate us!" It's incomprehensible to us. We're the beautiful Tom & Daisy Buchanan, speeding along in our cars and throwing our trash out the windows and maybe running over a child or two. "What did we do???" seemed to be the collective cry from the media after 9/11.

But then, how many Iraqis killed? Who fucking cares. (Jon Stewart commented that Bush's answer to that question, "I believe, umm, 30,000, give or take."--paraphrasing--was given in the same tone that he would use to estimate the number of Jellybeans in a jar.) And as to our government, our official policy, well, we're not going to try to count.

No adult is an "innocent" in some important ways. I don't believe it's a useful category for adults: we make decisions and act in the world and are at least partially responsible for the consequences of our actions. We are even more responsible for those consequences that are predictable to any degree, particularly if we have at our disposal the information to make reasonable predictions about the consequences of our actions. As a people, we voted for Bush & co, and we choose to view them as a legitimate government by not taking decisive action against them.

SO: Despite having voted against Bush, having marched against the war before it started and after, despite having volunteered many hours to his defeat before especially the second election, despite giving money to anti-Bush causes and organizations, I know that I still bear some responsibility for the actions he is taking, because in my daily life I accept the legitimacy of his occupation of the office.

My responsibility is not precisely the same as his responsibility, nor of those who pull his strings by donating massively to his campaigns, nor even of those who voted for him or otherwise supported him in the election, but I AM NOT INNOCENT.

Does that mean I should be "shot"?, as the the Kill 'em all, and let God sort 'em out? reductio ad absurdam of your argument suggests I should believe. No. That's not the point. In fact, that's the kind of logic that Bush and co use when they tell us we're either for us or against us. When they say that to claim any degree of culpablity for the actions of our government is essentialy to think like a terrorist, who they argue target civilians on the basis of this logic.

The thing is: I don't think anyone should be shot. I suspect that American supports the death penalty so strongly because of this "innocence" complex we have: you're either guilty or you're innocent, and if you're guilty you get death. It's X-treeeme Protestantism in the worst way.

It's like when I hang out with black people and they start complaining about white people being assholes, saying ignorant things, etc. I'm not "innocent" in the argument, I remain marked "white," but I'm not offended and my friends know that. I just read what they're saying in a pretty complicated way, because I know that most white people are the way they're saying, and that I benefit from white privilege on a daily basis. More importantly, I know that, in that conversation, "white" is being used to name and address the reality of racism, not to single me out. It's a kind of short hand.

In fact, at that point, I haven't become "invisible" as white, but my friends see me as "safe" in some key ways, as someone who "gets" it, so there's no need to say, "Oh of course I don't mean you."
 
 
illmatic
12:42 / 21.12.05
What a great post.

alas, how then do you relate to your responsibilities/ culpability in practice?
 
 
alas
18:41 / 21.12.05
alas, how then do you relate to your responsibilities/ culpability in practice?

Well...truth be told, like most middle-income people: pretty piss poorly. Pretty much I'm a coward, and lazy:I'm an academic, which I don't think is necessarily an ignoble profession, by any means, but then again, university-level education is increasingly exclusive in the US and a tremendous generator of income and wealth differences. I.e., that work, too, is not innocent or pure. It's not a "get out of American imperialism free" card.

I try to be humble, I guess. I do my best: I work intensively with students, especially students of color and I advise a student activist group and attend protests with them and try to support and model activist life for them as best I can. My scholarship is focused on poverty-related issues, has a global dimension, and is often directed to high school and college students, which is somewhat rare in academe, because it's not really rewarded by the system typically. But...

Well, my main focus, honestly, has been on raising my kids: I adopted two relatives out of foster care and am raising them. They are both in university now and are both globally aware and bilingual and have as good a chance as anyone I know of making a real difference in this world. And my partner has the guts to regularly run for (and lose!) local political offices, and I support his efforts.

There's an element of hoping they figure things out better than I have and still manage to not just survive the world but somehow thrive as humans in it.

That's the thing I'm not sure how to do, really. In my daily work I try to balance the things I have to do to survive/thrive as a human in this world and the things I need to do to try to resist the hideous direction I see this country taking, where I can do it. But it does often feel, as I said, like I'm rearranging deck chairs, not engaging in work that will change the direction of the boat.

And definitely I am sympathetic to Randy's and Jack's arguments because I know that there are structural impediments that make it quite difficult to do more: Americans work (many) more hours than Europeans on average and are paid less--the rat race is more ratty here. We're held for ransom to our work as a result of, esp., health care benefits. We have a massive military and a massive prison industrial complex that's abysmally destructive to low-income families and the grassroots, democratic process so efforts at re-engaging low-income workers are harder than ever. And distractions are so cheap! (I can't blame poor folks for preferring an escapist afternoon with cable TV than political organizing). And simple things: many neighborhoods lack sidewalks (like my current one) and have multilane highways with no crosswalks or pedestrian overpasses (like our earlier one). I can want to walk or ride a train but the evisceration of the democratic process makes it feel almost impossible to press for the infrastructure changes that would be required to make that possible. And gay rights are being attacked. And all at once!

That 80-year old Quaker I described up list? She spent 6 months in prison after "crossing the line" of the SOA/Whinsec. She inspires me. (She says, I'm paraphrasing of course, but basically: "Well, I'm retired now, so I could do this. And, I know prison was not the same for me as it was for the people who were there not by 'choice," but I found it inspiring and ... I shouldn't say this, but so interesting, communal, supportive, and, almost fun.")

I would like to be more like her in my daily life. But, well, as I said, combination of laziness (surely I could bike more than I do) and structural impediments. Trying minimize the former and seeking to change the latter ... What's that Gramsci line? "Pessimism of the intellect, optimism of the will." I try for that.
 
 
Our Lady Has Left the Building
07:53 / 22.12.05
Nina- Absolutism, great place to make speeches from, lousy in practice. After all, lumping together all those that didn't bother to vote (for whatever reason) in the last US Election, with all those who voted for one of the other candidates and the smaller minority that voted for Bush? Sure, it's valid to complain about those that didn't vote at all but the logical ending to your point of view is that the only valid form of resistance to a government is armed and bloody resistance. You are against capital punishment. Where do you stand on fighting and killing, both you as a person, an anti-government group of some kind and by the State?
 
 
Tryphena Absent
09:32 / 22.12.05
Let me think about that- I need to work out the logic of my own position. The bare bones of it are that I understand why the Palestinians suicide bomb but that Israel has no reason to kill Palestinian leaders with missiles. I don't think this would necessarily work for all situations of this type because action of this kind is always a response to the underlying power structures effecting individual lives. The state generally shouldn't kill but it's much more difficult for citizens to get rid of a government than vice versa and if a state doesn't kill there's far less reason for a population to get violent at all. Hence I'm more into Martin Luther King who has always seemed to me a rather cohesive and interesting person than Malcolm X who was justified but perhaps a little less proportionate in his response. As to anti-government groups- well, that's utterly dependent on the time, place, motivation. If Fathers 4 Justice were to start topping government officials I don't think any of us would think that was justified.
 
 
nyarlathotep's shoe horn
17:30 / 22.12.05
seems like losing the forest for the trees.

Nina, my guess is, that you are frustrated at the scale of atrocities being committed as exemplified by the US' current admistrative junta, and the apparent lack of effective opposition.

this thread, (most excellently provocative, btw), seems to reveal the frustration we have with feeling we must be correct, when at our heart, we feel our position is right.

don't know why, but the cruel indifference that leads to such merciless butchery makes me feel icky. It's just wrong.

despite all the facts in the world pointing to it being right. there's still that fundamental problem: killing people isn't good for anyone.

infallible logic can still be wrong. has isaac asimov taught us nothing? (well, there are the dirty limericks).

that said, how do we stop arms manufacture and distribution?

-not jack

ps monk and nina's conversation:

"However (and this is a partial quote): "I just want the country to evaporate", while forceful, is frankly distasteful in the same way the US policy toward, and treatment of, young Muslim men is"

an expressed desire to want a country to evaporate is very different from taking steps to make it so. Can't see how you jump to such a disparate equivocation, monk.

pps wrt "innocence." I don't think we're using the term, in this contect, to denote a moral purity of any sort. Say that the Iraqi garlic-merchant, no matter how disreputable, isn't directly involved with the US - yet still has to deal with them bombing his home, hometown, family, friends, business partners, country.

buddy just wants to sell his garlic. I'd say he's innocent in terms of foreign military aggression. Selling garlic isn't a particularly provocative activity.

However, if he's hiding massively destructive weapons, well... that's an offense worthy of a good immolation.

there are those outside the sphere of conflict who are forced to defend themselves against it. these are the "innocents." if you can think of a more descriptive term, then let's use that instead.
 
 
Our Lady Has Left the Building
18:33 / 22.12.05
not jack an expressed desire to want a country to evaporate is very different from taking steps to make it so. Can't see how you jump to such a disparate equivocation, monk.

Perhaps for the same reason anti-Israel statements by the President of Iran in the last two months has caused such a storm?
 
 
Mirror
22:31 / 22.12.05
Perhaps for the same reason anti-Israel statements by the President of Iran in the last two months has caused such a storm?

There's a power difference there that can't be overlooked. At least, I don't *think* that Nina has sufficient reach that such comments have much in the way of ramifications - the same is not true of the President of Iran.

Heck, I'm an American and I feel the same way sometimes. At very least, I find myself frequently wishing that Judgement Day would go ahead and happen and that the "faithful" would be taken up, just so that the rest of us could be rid of them and live in peace.
 
 
matthew.
14:36 / 27.12.05
I apologize outright if this post is ignorant of the "facts" and of world politics.

It seems to me that Nina is taking issue with America over numerous things: the atrocities committed abroad by the government and the atrocities committed within its own borders. If I have understood this, then Nina is also taking issue with the democratic-capitalist system that has allowed the villains into power, the villains who allowed the above atrocities to be committed.

If I have understood all of the above (and I hope I did), then Nina is blaming the problems of America on the democratic-capitalist system. She says she is Communist or Leninist (as her bf calls her).

Call me simplistic, but I think the democratic-capitalist system is the only one that works over the long term. Sure, it's a shitty system. It requires the exploitation of somebody, and that's shitty. Unfortunately, I know of no other system that allows zero exploitation of anybody. If my history lessons serve me right, communism hasn't been working very well in most communist countries. It requires a huge amount of exploitation or suppression or oppression. I equate communism with gulags, lack of free speech, lack of choice, lack of rights. I equate capitalism with the supposed "American Dream".

With capitalism, there is a chance of motion up the social and economic ladder. One can achieve millionaire status, the so-called "American Dream" (or at least, my intrepretation). There is mobility in capitalism, a mobility that seems sorely lacking in communism.

To sum up my point, capitalism is shit, but it's the only one that works.
(Please anybody correct me if I have misunderstood Nina's claims)
 
 
Ganesh
14:47 / 27.12.05
I'm not sure that it's just one system, though, Matt.
 
 
unheimlich manoeuvre
22:43 / 27.12.05
matt - With capitalism, there is a chance of motion up the social and economic ladder. One can achieve millionaire status, the so-called "American Dream" (or at least, my intrepretation). There is mobility in capitalism, a mobility that seems sorely lacking in communism.


From that hotbed of socialist propaganda The Economist
Dec 29th 2004
Whatever happened to the belief that any American could get to the top?
 
 
nyarlathotep's shoe horn
06:43 / 29.12.05
a big box landed on it.

-not jack
 
 
alas
15:30 / 29.12.05
(A big box called Wal-Mart?)

re: there are those outside the sphere of conflict who are forced to defend themselves against it. these are the "innocents." if you can think of a more descriptive term, then let's use that instead.

Civilian feels more accurate, first off. "Innocent" is a loaded term.

However, that said, I am most opposed to Americans coloring ourselves as "innocent" of our government policies. Particularly educated, wealthy Americans. If you live in the US and have access to a college-education, you are not "innocent" to the same degree that that Iraqi garlic-salesman is.

Note that I was not responding to a use of innocent in relation to those who are, essentially, defending themselves against the hegemonic power of the US, but to those who directly benefit from it and whose lives, like mine, are supported by it. For us to claim that we don't know what our government is doing and are therefore innocent of it--"we didn't know that Bush was so evil when we voted for him in 2004"--is the problem I have. If you live in the US and benefit from its hegemonic powe, you're not innocent.
 
  
Add Your Reply