Julian Cope presents Head Heritage

Head To Head
Log In
Register
U-Know! Forum »
another american beheaded.
Log In to post a reply

137 messages
Topic View: Flat | Threaded
Quexalcote
228 posts

Re: White House Rant
Jun 30, 2004, 04:13
AQ-

What a relief a reasoned reply is!

I'm not sure where to begin as I don't seem able to quote you on here, and my brain ain't wired to recall the particulars of your post, but...

My grievances aren't so much with those who are anti-war, I understand that position completely, and would share it if I honestly thought it was avoidable. I even cringe at writing that, but unfortunately, we're still members of the ape family and haven't evolved out of a stage where that is an option.

My problem is with what I consider a nihilistic position, espoused by Moore/Zinn/Chomsky and in a reductive but not substantially different way from Lawrence here, that there is not anything that the US could do that would be considered OK. Lawrence very revealingly has said that it would be fine with him if it were a righteous president behind it, and if GW didn't "get the credit". I support the forcible removal of Saddam precisely because I believe that progressive secular humanism, with maximum freedom for all people is preferable to dictatorship. Someone, maybe you, mentioned other countries that are just as bad or worse. I would very much like to see them gone as well. I would hope that humans could come up with better ways than wars, but I'm not sure what that way would be. The UN route was tried for a very long time, with not much of a result. I don't think that a commitment to humanist ideals should be construed to be a suicide pact when there's a nutjob who's made it clear that he means you no good.



GW is awful. An important difference is that he won't be president forever, and he does not have the final say on everryhting in this country even if he thinks he does. Things can and do change under the American system. Usually slowly. I don't think there was much hope of any change under a system like Iraq had.

It seems as if when the left mentions Saddam at all, they are tripping over their tongues to get to the part where they say, "BUT Bush...." I don't see this as a way to help anybody anywhere. See the Zinn article I mentioned elsewhere. It is so frustrating that smart folks like him and Chomsky spend so much time thinking of reasons why Bush is awful and why what's happened shouldn't have happened, and not thinking of practical suggestions for what could happen right now. Things that could help real live people, not the abstract, intellectualised people in their heads.

I think I've gotten way off course here, back later.
Topic Outline:

U-Know! Forum Index