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
