: : :: SDF: Interestingly enough. I've already disqualified Gideon Hallett's argument here against Stuart Gort. Pointing fingers at the other guy is no excuse for mass murder. The question we should be asking is whether the choice between state-capitalist imperialism (Stalin, Malenkov, Khrushchev, Brezhnev, Andropov, Chernenko) and corporate-capitalist imperialism (Johnson, Nixon, Ford, Carter, Reagan, Bush, Clinton) is the only choice we have. : : But my point is always missed in these discussions. I'm not trying to set up a pro-capitalist - anti-commusist argument. That is just the luck of the draw on this topic. I want that you don't think me to be a glad to kill commies, rabid pro-capistalist, BD freak. I want that you don't characterize every U.S. military effort in reaction to Soviet imperialism as a capitalistic knee-jerk. I truly respect a man or woman who puts life at risk for my sake.
: SDF: The war against Yugoslavia, the ethnic cleansing, the bombing of embassies, the pollution of the Danube, the spreading of depleted uranium, etc., could have been prevented had the US actually negotiated with Milosevic before the war instead of trying to impose Appendix B of Rambouillet upon him and his country. Did the men and women who bombed Belgrade do so "for Stuart Gort's sake"? Supporting the troops does not mean supporting the foreign policy which directs their orders. But I am repeating myself here, as is Gort.
: : These were real live atrocities being committed by soulless men who had to be stopped.
: SDF: Stuart Gort, usurping the role of his god, has seen inside the souls of others, and judged them to be truly "soullless," so as to wrap what is basically an issue of US foreign policy in theological side-debates. I have no desire to participate in such side-debates, nor need I do so in order to criticize US foreign policy, as I did here.
: : I wish to hear you one day acknowledge that it had to be done. I fear that you can't do this because if there is any justification at all for the U.S. to exist, in your mind the ideology you admire begins to crumble.
: SDF: I'd like to know more about the ideology I admire. What are its tenets?
: : As long as the U.S. is evil, it becomes irrelevent how well capitalism serves the general citizen.
: SDF: Capitalism doesn't serve the general citizen. It does serve these people, however. Democracy does serve the people, however.
: : I believe it is demonstrably better than communism by comparison, of course, but that doesn't translate to be rabid support or unquestioning trust of men to rule other men. I know there is nothing perfect about either ideology.
: SDF: Hoarding is not better than sharing -- democracy is better than dictatorship.
: : I want to but still do not understand what motivates you to so adamantly support an ideology that comes from a man.
: SDF: Libertarians support an ideology that comes from a man, Adam Smith. Or was it Ludwig von Mises? What motivates them so?
: : Marx, who was certainly a genius, had flaws as we all do. Even if he was perfect, his ideology must be administered by men - who have always failed to administer anything perfectly.
: SDF: Marx called for the "withering away of the state," and a transition from the governing of people to the administration of things. The main criticism I would have of "Marxist administration" would be, given the above truths about Marx, that it hasn't happened yet, and that it may never happen. For a genuine criticism, one that doesn't misquote Marx, please read the chapter on Marx in volume 2 of Jurgen Habermas' THEORY OF COMMUNICATIVE ACTION.
Sam, would your position change at all if I was to eliminate the word "communist" from this discussion and substitute the phrase "Imperialistic Soviets"? Your correct in assessing my position as not even remotely interested in the details of Marxism. Leave Marx to the intellectuals and I will happily bear their derision for my lack of a detailed engagement of the subject. Marx was a man and cannot save us.
My point in these discussions is not the pure application of Marxism or any other ideal. It is only your lack of any ability to ascribe any moral justification to the opposistion of Soviet imperialism in southeast Asia, central America, or anywhere else.
I certainly admit to widespread zealoutry and bad policy as the U.S. fought the cold war and engaged in armed conflict. Will you admit that the Soviets were imperialists and have had a major influence in every one of the proliferating ventures of communism (or whatever collectivist expression you wish to use)? If the "communist" tag doesn't suite you can you at least allow that the U.S. had a duty to stop "Soviet imperialism" and that cause could be considered moral? The Black Book documents the depravity that was U.S.S.R. policy of the 50's and 60's. To have not put up a hand to stop it could have been to allow the world to have been enveloped by it.
The words which were used to establish our nation were noble and pure without argument. Is there hypocracy and failure to live up to those words everywhere on this planet? Of course there is! Does that hypocracy attack the credibility of our system. Of course it does! Argue to that failure if you must but allow that there are men who die nobly. Please allow that there are those who see and know what is happening in this world more than you or I and that perhaps, just perhaps they are motivated by their responsibility to oath and honor.
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness. That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed. That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.
And if a man lays his life down for that he desrves honor because that is good.
Stuart Gort
