Date: Mon, 08 Oct 2001 16:28:54 +1100
From: hbone <hbone-AT-optonline.net>
Subject: Re: Different approach to terrorist threat


This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

--Boundary_(ID_xmx1HJg5wxk1UBnTUIyaBw)

  I believe in discussing any statements that oppose your beliefs.

  I doubt than any of us are privy to absolute, incontestable truth(s).  


  Best regards,
  Hugh
  ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

  I had never realised that you were such a supporter of republicanism, bush and the American way of things. I had made the assumption that there would be a reluctance to support the military adventurism that the US and the rest of the G8 countries are engaging in, at least on this and the other predominantly American lists but this appears not to be the case. Scanning through the mails and lists it's plain that for the moment there is a clustering around the imaginary notion of  america, a little uncertainty is appearing but not as much as I'd have expected by this time.

  Are you being deliberately provocative or do you really believe the below?

  regards
  sdv

  hbone wrote:

Eric wrote:
Shawn and Steve have talked about how government is merely a historicaland technological aberration, one that has usually not been on the sideof human life. I agree. Government as a weapon has often been used inthe past to dominate and oppress its own citizenry.  Government as aweapon is a loaded gun and, therefore, always dangerous.

As Noam Chomsky and others have pointed out, however, government as aweapon is also a two-edged sword.  In the past, it has often been thevehicle through which grievances has been addressed, rights defended andpositive as well as negative freedoms granted.
Yes, weapons are dangerous by definition. A gun that won't fire is only aclub.The scale of government is very important.  The rules in the home orcongregatiion, club or workplace can be harsh of mild, but essentiallyaffect only those groups.  International rules are only as strong as thenations who support them.Most nations have had "Civil" wars and slaughtered thousands of their own.England's civil war was quite long ago, but England slaughtered its ownAmerican colonists including some born in England.   That happened not longbefore the French civil war, we call their "Revolution"..The local governments that keep most of us relatively safe from fires andcriminal attack, operate within a framework of nation-law. The U.S.Constitution permits a process which allows a change of leadership andrules, subject to review by severall levels of courts, and ultimately,  theSupreme court.The law of the land is what the Supreme Court says it is.  Such is the onlygovernment we have, the only means of protecting ourselves from each other,from other nations, and from future McVeighs or Bin Ladens.We've had WWI and WWII.  Some of us may be ready for American Revolution II.Like all Revolutions, it could only be accomplished by the bonding oftraitors, spying on and killing our fellow-citizens, carnage on a massivescale, think of the War between the States.On the other hand, there is freedom to make peaceful change.  By acombination of loyal and disloyal acts, as in the Civil Rights  and VietnamWar resistance movements, you and those who share your views, can changehearts and minds and conduct, and replace the the policies of the onlygovernment we have, with policies you support.Thus would be fashioned a reformed weapon of government.  This nation wouldthen be in a position to commence the task of
changing minds, attitudes,practices, of the near 200 nations who share the Globe with us, and begin amovement to solve  problems of Globalization, create a new form of GlobalGovernment that works.What such a plan would have in common with the Bush plan would be patienceand courage when each new terrorist tragedy is launched.Best,Hugh



--Boundary_(ID_xmx1HJg5wxk1UBnTUIyaBw)

HTML VERSION:

I believe in discussing any statements that oppose your beliefs.

 

I doubt than any of us are privy to absolute, incontestable truth(s). 

 

 

Best regards,

Hugh
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

I had never realised that you were such a supporter of republicanism, bush and the American way of things. I had made the assumption that there would be a reluctance to support the military adventurism that the US and the rest of the G8 countries are engaging in, at least on this and the other predominantly American lists but this appears not to be the case. Scanning through the mails and lists it's plain that for the moment there is a clustering around the imaginary notion of  america, a little uncertainty is appearing but not as much as I'd have expected by this time.

Are you being deliberately provocative or do you really believe the below?

regards
sdv

hbone wrote:

Eric wrote:

Shawn and Steve have talked about how government is merely a historical
and technological aberration, one that has usually not been on the side
of human life. I agree. Government as a weapon has often been used in
the past to dominate and oppress its own citizenry.  Government as a
weapon is a loaded gun and, therefore, always dangerous.

As Noam Chomsky and others have pointed out, however, government as a
weapon is also a two-edged sword.  In the past, it has often been the
vehicle through which grievances has been addressed, rights defended and
positive as well as negative freedoms granted.

Yes, weapons are dangerous by definition. A gun that won't fire is only a
club.

The scale of government is very important.  The rules in the home or
congregatiion, club or workplace can be harsh of mild, but essentially
affect only those groups.  International rules are only as strong as the
nations who support them.

Most nations have had "Civil" wars and slaughtered thousands of their own.
England's civil war was quite long ago, but England slaughtered its own
American colonists including some born in England.   That happened not long
before the French civil war, we call their "Revolution"..

The local governments that keep most of us relatively safe from fires and
criminal attack, operate within a framework of nation-law. The U.S.
Constitution permits a process which allows a change of leadership and
rules, subject to review by severall levels of courts, and ultimately,  the
Supreme court.
The law of the land is what the Supreme Court says it is.  Such is the only
government we have, the only means of protecting ourselves from each other,
from other nations, and from future McVeighs or Bin Ladens.

We've had WWI and WWII.  Some of us may be ready for American Revolution II.
Like all Revolutions, it could only be accomplished by the bonding of
traitors, spying on and killing our fellow-citizens, carnage on a massive
scale, think of the War between the States.

On the other hand, there is freedom to make peaceful change.  By a
combination of loyal and disloyal acts, as in the Civil Rights  and Vietnam
War resistance movements, you and those who share your views, can change
hearts and minds and conduct, and replace the the policies of the only
government we have, with policies you support.

Thus would be fashioned a reformed weapon of government.  This nation would
then be in a position to commence the task of
changing minds, attitudes,
practices, of the near 200 nations who share the Globe with us, and begin a
movement to solve  problems of Globalization, create a new form of Global
Government that works.

What such a plan would have in common with the Bush plan would be patience
and courage when each new terrorist tragedy is launched.

Best,
Hugh