FirmhandKY
Posts: 8948
Joined: 9/21/2004
Status: offline
|
NG,
In the rest of your two posts to me, I see several basic philosophical differences from me - which lead you to conclusions I would contest - along with a streak of unwillingness to credit my words with what they mean.
You seem to wish to paint me as a bloodthirsty, tyrannt supporting ideologue simply because I am willing to support my own way of life, and beliefs. You seem to misunderstand and then mistate those very beliefs to support your position:
NG:
6. Is your personal wealth more important than the life of an Iraqi? i.e. on another thread you said US foreign policy should serve Americans, regardless of the consequences. Why do you believe you should not respect the wishes of sovereign nations, and what exactly is it that makes your interests more important than life?
FirmKY
Here, I believe we are walking into deep moral issues, and some requirements to see a larger picture that some people do not wish to address for reasons of moral blindness or fear.
I don't see the US's action in Iraq as primarily one of financial considerations. If it were, we could have approached it much differently, and at much less cost to ourselves in money, and in lost human lives. Your (and others) belief is a function of a will to believe and a skewed understanding of a lot of issues, that I don't think you can address in one simple post, or even a thread.
I quite plainly say that I do not see the driving force for our involvement in Iraq as one due to financial considerations, which is a cornerstone of your belief system.
I think this highlights a basic differences in our two belief systems, and why you seem so comfortable in your attempts to paint me (and the US) in such dark fashions.
This is actually not uncommon with many people who see the world in terms of a stark difference in economic terms of "haves" and "have nots".
I don't remember if you have said this, but many others have, and Lady E touched upon it in her post about the definition of "quality of life": Economics isn't everything. Important, certainly, but not necessarily determinative. There is a moral or spiritual component to life that is difficult to measure, but nonetheless factors into the equation.
Often the same people who claim that economic factors are so important to "equality" and "true freedom" and discount other factors such as morality, spirituality and culture then use their own morality as the basis for their claims of "fairness" and what is right and wrong, and attempt to force their beliefs on people who do not see the world the same way.
It's a blindness I think I've said. They are guilty - in my mind - of doing the very thing that they accuse me and Americans of doing, (imposing our beliefs on others) yet they fail to see it in themselves.
I've said plainly that I believe that a liberal economic system and what is commonly called "democracy" (actually, a increase in individual freedoms and rights) are intrinsically related. The concept is that inherent in the belief in "free markets" is a social drive to property rights and the rule of law that are conducive to establishing and generally reinforcing of the very concept of an autonomous individual imbued with "rights" that extend beyond simply the ownership of property.
I'm not sure if you agree or disagree with this point, because while you "accept" a liberal economic system as a prerequisite to a "democractic society", you then go to great lengths to redefine it in such a way that denies the very concept.
It really comes out in your refusal to credit either the US or myself with anything other than base financial motives for our actions, when to me, economic activity and beliefs are a part - but not necessarily the primary or even driving - factor in those actions. You are displaying "absolutist" thinking.
NG:
The reason I asked this question was because on another thread you said foreign policy was simply a means of satsifying your interests:
1) US foreign policy includes killing people in Iraq.
2) It is serving your interests - whether financial or some other real or perceived interest.
3) Does it follow that you believe your interests are worth more than others' lives?
I don't see the US's action in Iraq as primarily one of financial considerations.
In terms of your quote above that I've placed in italics, I'm curious, what do you see as the primary consideration?
...
a) There are more ideas in the world than capitalism. You make it sound like it is the world against the Middle East, and this is a nonsense view.
...
b) You appear to be saying they are free to determine their way of life providing they agree with your way of life. In other words, agree with you and the US system, or face armed violence and suppression.
...
This was my worry with you, Firmhand. You're going to show them how they should lead their lives. You believe you have the one true answer, and consequently no sacrifice is too great for it.
...
In other words, you're going to make them better people - measured according to your ideals - by killing some of them.
...
For example, I think your idea of imposing your idea around the world is stark raving mad, but I'm not going to suppress your ideas, nor try to kill you or members of your family to bring you 'round to my way of thinking.
...
Basically, you want to close down ideas that are opposed to yours. The very antithesis of democracy i.e. mass participation. You're not democratic, Firmhand - you're a supporter of tryanny.
...
The righteousness of your idea is so blinding for you that you can not get your head around the obvious - your views on Iraq are akin to tyranny, they are nothing to do with democracy.
All of these above quotes flow from your basic misunderstanding (or lack of desire) to understand my clear words:
1. "Freedom" and "capitalism" are intertwined.
2. A world system which embraces capitalism will favor other systems which you can largely group under an umbrella of "democracy" - increased individual freedoms.
3. The first order of business for capitalism is order, and an adherence to the rule of law.
4. Middle Eastern societies, overall, are not based on the rule of law, but on strong men, tribes, and religious beliefs that do not favor the type of order that is conducive to greater individual freedom and the reinforcing capitalist system.
5. However, until those societies actually threatened the stability of the world capitalist system, they were "free" to work out their own destiny, culture and society.
6. As part of their "freedom of cultural choice", a certain active portion of that culture has choosen to oppose the basics of the Western world i.e. secularism, democracy and capitalism through death, destruction, terrorism etc.
7. The US's actions in Iraq are an attempt to reorder the basis of Middle Eastern society, by demonstrating that a capitalistic, non-religious-based, rule-of-law-based society can exist and prosper in their culture milieu.
8. The US (and all other Western capitalistic democracies) will benefit from such a successful change, by removing one of the fundamental issues that drives the Islamic terrorists and increasing global markets.
9. The reording of a society in such a drastic way is rarely done without opposition. The tools and methods required, therefore, will (and do) require force and the short-term unhappiness of some people.
You read the words only in order to find fault, not to understand.
Since you reveal in your words that you have a moral repugnance for everything that the US is built on, and espouses (which was my reason for exposing your belief in the "evil" of the US), your reactions to my words aren't rational: they are emotional.
No where did I say that I think violence is the best, or even sole preferred method to increase (impose?) "freedom". It's just that sometimes it is a required method to defend yourself.
No where did I say that other countries, cultures and societies must adhere to US beliefs. Simply that when they use unacceptable methods in an attempt to destroy or alter my society, that the use of force can be an appropriate tool to convince them of the error of their ways:
However, until those societies actually threatened the stability of the world capitalist system, they were "free" to work out their own destiny, culture and society.
The issue of "re-ordering" a Arabic Middle Eastern society to something approaching Western systems of government - a liberal economic system, and the belief in the rule of law - isn't simply a crass attempt to impose "the best" system because we are cultural imperialist. It's an attempt to change the dynamic of the overall culture by growing the institutions that will support a peaceful culture no longer interested in the death and destruction of my family, my friends, my countrymen, and my fellow Westerners.
It's a protective measure (although I'm sure you'll disagree). The use of force to protect yourself is a valid moral option. The fact that it will likely increase the level of and encourage personal freedom for the members of that society is simply a large "plus" side effect.
The fact that it will increase the global market for US and other capitalistic nations is another plus.
Another important factor that you confuse is the particular for the general i.e you wish to condemn all US policy for all time based on specific incidents of foreign policy that you disagree with such as the replacement of some hostile governments.
The problem with this is a failure to appreciate the messy aspect of human nature, and the wider conflicts and issues surrounding those decisions. Plus the fact that not all decisions and actions do indeed fit the moral framework that the US generally espouses.
Yes, sometimes we fail to live up to our rhetoric. It happens. But you wish to throw out the baby with the bath water. I don't.
Lots of issues not covered. I'm particularly interested in your 6 pillars of democracy, because I disagree with some of them, and your beliefs about "equal opportunity" and "wealth distribution", but I think I'll wait for a while.
FirmKY
_____________________________
Some people are just idiots.
|
RE: "Better alternative establishments" and t... - 
Profile
New Messages
No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages
Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages
Locked w/o New Messages
Post New Thread