---------------------------------------------------------------------------
This message includes replies to: Carrol Cox, Doug Henwood,
Michael Perelman, Louis Proyect, Jim Devine
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Messages in this group:
* Re: pen-l conspiracy?
* Re: pen-l conspiracy?
* Re: pen-l conspiracy?
* Re: Hijacking and controlling planes into targets on 9-11-2001
=========== Message 0
=========== Subject: Re: pen-l conspiracy?
At around 13/6/06 1:20 pm, Michael Perelman wrote:
> The flag was made out of tinfoil and shaped to make it look like it
> was waving. Thus spake NASA.
>
See, isn't that a lot more convincing and useful as an answer, than
saying "Bah humbug, conspiracy theory"? ;-)
=========== Message 1
=========== Subject: Re: pen-l conspiracy?
At around 13/6/06 1:23 pm, Jim Devine wrote:
> how about the other flights to the moon. Were they faked too?
>
> I know, I know, no-one on pen-l believes that the flight to the moon
> was faked. Or do they?
>
The only honest answer I can give is that I do not know, and I am happy
to leave it that way, since the answer, I believe, does not impact me in
any significant way (though a large chunk of tax dollars is wasted on
NASA each year for such gimmicks).
=========== Message 2
=========== Subject: Re: pen-l conspiracy?
At around 13/6/06 1:52 pm, Carrol Cox wrote:
> ravi wrote:
>>
>> I think Doug wrote something about "Arabs can't fly the plane by
>> themselves. It requires the Great White father". With all respect to
>> Doug, I think this critique is a diversion, a [no doubt unintentional,
>> if at all] attempt to cast the opponent as a racist, and dismiss his
>> argument.
>
> I do not think it a diversion at all. While particular believers may or
> may not themselves be racist, racism tends to be characteristic
> (implicitly or explicitly) of almost all conspiracy theory. This is
> often true even of instances where a conspiracy _does_ exist.
>
Even if I were to agree with this claim (which I am afraid I do not)
this does not sit well with Doug's later comment that Arabs themselves
believe in this inferiority, and surely they cannot be racist against
themselves? This is a diversion because of a simple reason: irrespective
of whether the proponents are racist are not, they present an argument
that is not based on racism (or at least, if so, the burden of proving
that lies on their critics). An answer is due to the questions raised,
and it is not always valid to respond that all questions are "Have you
stopped beating your wife yet?" type questions.
>
>> Often so called "conspiracy" arguments are useful even if they are not
>> entirely valid. One or more of the questions they pose may be genuinely
>> problematic and lead to facts that we might otherwise not have any clue to.
>
> No. Even actual conspiracies are best left alone, because the kinds of
> questions that can only be decisively decided in a courtroom or other
> special forum become pure diversion from serious politics when they are
> raised.
>
This goes back to my response to Michael. At some point truth and fact
should matter also, not just serious politics. I do not see why such
issues always need a court for resolution. We (humans) have examined and
changed our minds about various explanations, and often, AFAIK, this has
not involved courts or special fora.
> Anyone who can't
> be reached through pointing out the everyday and widely known horrors of
> u.s. imperialism will not be reached by meticulous arguments as to how
> the C.I.A. works.
(a) IIRC, you (correctly) point out that we need a plurality of actions
since we never know what is going to lead us to some traction towards
attaining our goals. A pursuit of facts in a significant affair, seems
like a good act within such a spectrum.
(b) Perhaps meticulous arguments about how the CIA works is part of how
one points out the horrors of imperialism. I think you are being way too
pessimistic in your evaluation of the value of unearthing the facts in
these matters. For example, I think Chomsky's books and talks (which
often, at least to me, seem to perform exactly this function) are quite
a valuable activity.
(c) In fact, I would claim that use of terms like "imperialism" are what
cause the general public to turn a deaf ear to our arguments. The term
may in fact be quite right. But its use is not perceived as such today.
It's like me trying to argue with U.Sers that you "take" something to a
remote person, not "bring" it. I just sound stuffy when I push it too far.
> That last point is central. The crimes of capitalism and of imperialism
> can be demonstrated vividly with facts that no one disputes. Pushing
> arguable facts is a mug's game and only creates political confusion and
> apathy, as well (often or usually) also reinforcing tacit racist
> assumptions.
Carrol, I wager that anyone with any interaction with an "independent"
(or member of the apolitical public) will point out that "crimes of
capitalism and of imperialism" is a way more "arguable fact" than
whether the US funded thugs in Nicaragua or El Salvador. The former
identifies you as a "pinko commie America hater", so why don't you just
leave the country?
=========== Message 3
=========== Subject: Re: Hijacking and controlling planes into targets
on 9-11-20
At around 13/6/06 3:31 pm, Louis Proyect wrote:
>> What is "political Islam"? Does it include the Muslim League in India?
>> Would this sentence also be valid if modified as "It is a fact that
>> political Christianity embraces terrorism"? Or "political Judaism"? Or
>> "political Hinduism"? (BJP/VHP/Shiv Sena/RSS).
>
> Political Islam is just another term for radical Islam or Islamic
> fundamentalism, etc. It includes Hamas, al-Qaeda and other such groups.
>
Louis,
if you will bear with me, this does not make sense, since it seems
circular: those Islamic groups that have or use violence (terrorism)
embrace terrorism. We shall call them political Islamists.
Additionally, as a term, it seems a poor one. Why isn't a member of the
Muslim League an Political Islamist, if one uses the general meaning of
the two words?
--ravi
