I dunno, am I going to get called an anti-Semite for disagreeing with you? Who is Lenny and what mouse??
Let me break it down real nice and slow. Holocaust=genocide Rwanda=genocide slaughter of Indians= genocide potato famine=elimination of a people through starvation=genocide The Holocaust in its systematic application of industrial processes to mass murder was particularly evil. However in my simple tribal way the potato famine disturbs me as much or perhaps more because those were *my* people. This sentiment does not belittle the horror of the rest of it. If there was any mention of Palestinians you must have made it. I make no claim to know anything at all about that situation and never have. Without going into your vast oversimplification of what Socrates said, realize that he also said that he felt he had to drink the hemlock because he had lived as a citizen of Athens and therefore should live by the law of Athens. The argument could be made that if you live in the United States you bear some responsibility for the laws of the United States. I disagree with Socrates about the hemlock and I think I disagree with Churchill, if only because, as a matter of pragmatics, the US government is not all that responsive to the concerns of the individual. But it's not that off-the-wall a train of thought. Eichman was aware of what he was doing and his defense was that he was just being a good bureaucrat and if he had refused to do the job someone else would have done it. That's the parallel as I see it. Obviously the line is more indirect from Wall Street to the children of Iraq than it was from Eichmann to the children of Aushwitz, which is yet another problem with the parallel. But hey, Karl Rove has nothing on you. We can't get into the moral issues because we have to worry about everyone's love life and past history. It does seem that Heidegger had some Nazi ties and that Arendt was his student. So were Sartre and Jasper and some others. I don't necessarily see that she wrote what she wrote about Eichmann because of Heidegger at all.... it was not written at a time when they were in contact and I don't know enough about either to trace out his influence on her. So I am back to taking the book as written. At face validity, it raises some rather troubling issues. ::shrug:: Dana On Wed, 2 Feb 2005 14:04:31 -0800, Sam <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I wasn't angry about the potato famine. I do find it odd that when you > were talking about Palestinians being victims you also mentioned the > potato famine. > > Lenny needed to be put to death because he held the mouse too tight. > He loved the mouse. Eichmann was not Lenny, he knew what he was doing > and often bragged about it. Just because he didn't hate Jews doesn't > mean he wasn't evil. There's no way get around the fact that he was > evil and he was a Nazi. > > Churchill claimed the people in the towers sent the Iraqi children to > their deaths by not stopping their government, Like Eichmann the Nazi > sent millions to their death. > Eichmann is known as the Chief Executioner not a dumb patsy. So why do > you insist Churchill didn't really mean they 9/11 victims were like > Nazi's? > Churchill also called the victims the intellectual elite that chose to > let it happen, not idiots that were just following orders. > > As of Socrates, it's been ten years since I read Plato so I may be > wrong but I see no connection. Socrates claim was the people not > involved with politics were unfit to vote. Socrates had the option of > arguing for freedom of speech but chose not to. > I don't see the tie-in with a mass murderer. > > Are we done with this yet? > > > On Wed, 2 Feb 2005 12:09:41 -0700, Dana wrote: > > Sam > > > > Considering that you went from "angry about the potato famine" to > > "anti-Semite" in the blink of an eye I don't know what to make of your > > assertion that Heidegger was a Nazi. If so I am not aware of it, but I > > don't know squat about the man. If anyone else knows I'd appreciate a > > rational voice on this. Otherwise I guess I'll have to look it up. But > > it's a side issue. > > > > I don't believe you have read the book. It was not a defense of > > Eichmann. It concluded that he deserved to be put to death.. > > > > Along the way it expressed some very complex thoughts about the > > capacity of most people for evil. It is this that it is best known for > > and this, I think, that Churchill was referring to when he called the > > people in the twin towers Eichmanns. His argument actually derives in > > a straight line from Socrates and the hemlock and although I disagre > > with it and with the language in which it is presented, is pretty > > respectable in its logic. > > > > Nor am I in any way shape or form defending Eichmann or anyone else > > that commits mass murder. I resent the allegation that I would want to > > and frankly that thought makes me doubt your sanity. Get this > > straight. If I say a post may upset you this is not an invitation to > > read it. If you must read it anyway think before you call me vile > > things. Try to stay connected to reality, and preferably leave me out > > of your thoughts. > > > > Thank you. > > > > Dana > > > > > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Find out how CFTicket can increase your company's customer support efficiency by 100% http://www.houseoffusion.com/banners/view.cfm?bannerid=49 Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:5:145975 Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/5 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:5 Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.5 Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54
