=
×

Julian Cope presents Head Heritage

Head To Head
Log In
Register
U-Know! Forum »
Calling Grufty Jim (& the rest of you 2)
Log In to post a reply
60 messages
Topic View: Flat | Threaded
grufty jim
grufty jim
1978 posts

Re: Knockando
Nov 09, 2002, 15:08
Hey YAIP,

firstly - a side issue. I personally believe that 2048-bit PGP encryption is more than adequate to secure communications between activists. I understand that you don't, and am not seeking to change your mind; i merely wish to present an alternate viewpoint lest those unfamiliar with encryption read your message and assume it is inherently unsafe.

secondly - there is a crucial sentence in your message...
>
> And don't try to appeal to the possible local
> loss of life, that concerns me little compared
> to the big picture
>
As we differ on this fundamental issue, i see no point in my trying to dissuade you from your course of action. You instruct me not to pursue what i consider to be *the* vital ethical / philosophical reason not to attack the vital resource supporting millions of people.

I believe that if you oppose an activity on ethical grounds (in this case, the primary ethical transgression is the death of innocent people in pursuit of a political goal); then one cannot legitimately oppose it by committing the same crimes. You state that "killing a few innocents" is acceptable to save many, without really taking on board the reality that "killing a few inocents" turns you into the very monsters you wish to resist.

So you don't have the money and weapons to do it on as big a scale as Dubya. Poor you. But so long as you can justify treating people's lives as your personal political capital, based on "acting for the better good", then you set yourself up to be viewed in an identical ethical light to Bush, Blair and Saddam.

In my life, people i love have died. I'm sure the same can be said for you, and most people reading. I know how that felt. And i know that to deliberately inflict *that* pain on another human being is crime enough. But to deprive someone of a future, of the chance to achieve their dreams? To do that is to reject all i believe worth saving about humanity. To reject that is to say that actually, the people in Iraq are not your motivation - cos they'd be expendable for some "other, larger" cause i presume. Your real motivation therefore becomes just as suspect as the people you resist.

Now, i understand how hopelessly idealistic this sounds... though i'll thank you not to use the word "naïve" - that implies i'm unaware of the arguments against my position, and believe me when i say i'm aware of them.

I have simply taken an ethical position with regards to what i believe are the limitations upon my right to act in the world. You have chosen a different limit - and i guess all the oil / resource analysis i can provide will not alter that.

As an aside, having spent a while researching this industry, i can think of several ways to cripple the UK's fuel distribution network. It's actually a very fragile thing, and remarkably volatile. I cannot think of a single one that would not result in some loss of life. And that - as i say - is unacceptable to me.
In reply to:
Knockando (YerArseInParsley)		 Replies:
Encryption (YerArseInParsley)
Fight the beast (YerArseInParsley)
Chomsky on violence (YerArseInParsley)
Topic Outline:
U-Know! Forum Index