I wonder what is the reason many good intention people loose the perspective and the magnitude of human rights violations, oppression and tyranny. After all, and with all the problems the US is a strong liberal democracy – much more than Iran. The US policy, including its foreign policy, is being criticized publicly without the fear of ant secret police. And most importantly in US the regime changes periodically, through elections and not revolutions.
Fundamentalism and extremism are usually bad traits and have devastating effect on every society. In the US a president might be a fundamentalist, much like in Iran. In the US, however, its power is limited by many restraints such as constitution , political system and most importantly – length of term.
I can only hope that the left will hurry to adopt the Euston Manifesto. It is a demonstration to the left that they can be loyal to its ideals without committing suicide.Moreover, and although I don't agree with big portions of the left's social agenda, I can see much more sense in left's logic when in the context of the Euston Manifesto.
I do believe that Rogel is actually being quite reasonable and I can even understand his position. So check out his post, the Euston Manifesto and think about it. On my way home from dropping off my kids at school I was looking at the traffic and contemplated how it's almost a schizophrenic society where, when you dig deeper, really bad things happen while on the surface, everything seems just fine. The issues I'm referring to is the continuous attempts to limit civil liberties, the subversive attempts in Latin America still in order to keep the countries under the US' hegemonies clout, Iraq, torture (and what a 'fine' compromise they made on that)..etc.
Anyhow..Rogel is to me not extreme by no stretch even if I don't agree with him fully ,but I think he does represent a proportion of people who are reasonable and do not just dismiss things the way the RR does so..to quote 'baby face Nelson' (oh brother where art thou); give it a think!
Hi Ingrid,
ReplyDeleteTwo short points:
Firstly I do agree that many things in the US aren't as they should be. Furthermore I see how civil liberties taking a hit and its make me worry. However, I disagree that the US is more dangerous than Iran and I suggested to put things in the right perspective.
Second, I would really be more interesting in the readers opinion about the Euston Manifesto because I beleive it is one of the most important things the left came with in recent years.
Rogel, that's one of the reasons I put it out there so that hopefully it would receive some comments. I think that America's (ie. really talking about Bush's administration) reach and meddling in other countries is far more wide and corrupt than Iran's. I think Iran is merely reacting to the US and also Israel's actions and policies. Israel has nuclear abilities and is therefore a great concern for Middle Eastern countries. I think that with so much talk though on both sides (i.e. Iran and Israel) about the 'other' sides' threat, there is disagreement as to whom presents the greater or the 'first' initiating threat. I don't think we (as in, you and I) will see eye to eye on that, but that's ok. After all, it's just engaging in discussion as we are really not able to effect anything. I appreciate your perspectives though as it is not the way I think which in a way, keeps me on my 'toes' so to speak. When someone disagrees, you really have to AND question yourself as to why you have your own viewpoints, AND you have to think clearly as to how to present your argument, which is a good exercise. I'll be the first to say that I have changed my mind on things because I had to think about my own thoughts a little longer. As for the manifesto, and again, I just came home from playing with the kids outside and have to get off the computer soon to get them ready for bed..I have not read it again other than the scanning I did yesterday. The language of number 6 really bothers me, my hackels just go up. It sounds very apologetic as if it's a feeble attempt to gain the respect of conservatives of which ever stripes, rather than an honest reflection of what they think. It sounds as if they try hard to be accepted more than anything. However, having said that, I will re-read it tomorrow morning as I will have some time to myself..
ReplyDeletethe notion of balancing critique with acknowledging the good though has been going through my head lately, as I see this society, civic and political to be one of many layers. The 'bad' ones these days more overt but other goings on are still happening on the background. I will draw your attention to a transcript I will be working on for the dj I am apprenticing with. He had a very interesting interview monday night. So if I forget, hopefully you'll remember it when I post it on my site,
thanks for being available for discussing things that we do not have similar views on. I do not necessarily seek everybody's 'yea' on everything I post or think..
Ingrid
i won't rehash my whole blog here. i think that there is no greater patriotism than standing up for what america is supposed to stand for. my perception is limited to my blog circle and i can only speak to that. i think that my leftist friends and i see that america's big, honking problems started with bush. i don't think that this manifesto is saying anything really- it is trying to blend the right wing with the left wing and make it look like it is a center left manifesto. common sense is enough for me. cheney wanted to expand the executive branch since nixon's admin gutted it through watergate. and so he has- at the expense of our civil liberties.
ReplyDelete