tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post115774665401200358..comments2024-03-19T05:35:07.296-07:00Comments on CONTRARY BRIN: The REAL Road to 9/11...David Brinhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14465315130418506525noreply@blogger.comBlogger54125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-33171757034073212172016-10-20T07:04:54.751-07:002016-10-20T07:04:54.751-07:00Sorry to post so late in this thread, but isn'...Sorry to post so late in this thread, but isn't the programme it's about actually called "The <b>Path</b> to 9/11"?<br /><br />"The <b>Road</b> to 9/11" (or to give it its full title, "The Road to 9/11: A Brief History of Conflict in the Middle East") was a different documentary made in 2005, and wasn't an attack on the Clinton administration.George Cartyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12170378024031141482noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-1158568842902830322006-09-18T01:40:00.000-07:002006-09-18T01:40:00.000-07:00David Brin said Maybe the greatest in the history ...<I> David Brin</I> said<BR/><BR/><B> Maybe the greatest in the history of this galaxy. I plan to die defending it.</B><BR/><BR/>I know i'm being nitpicky here, and I realize that your statement is simply emphasizing how important how important defending our great experiment is, but I noticed anyway. <BR/>What is so great about dying for a cause? It's a romantic notion, and certainly there are certain instances where one (or a group) of people have stepped into life threatening or even hopeless situations to protect/rescue others. Heck, the 'noble sacrifice' is a tradition in much of our fiction.<BR/><BR/>But dead men (emotionally or physically) spread no memes. Though possibly not intended, that ending also seems to have a hint of desperation to it.<BR/><BR/>I am concerned (as many rightly are) about the spread of what I would interperet as the <A HREF="http://www.davidbrin.com/newmemewar1.html" REL="nofollow"> paranoia meme</A> under the guise of neoconservatism.<BR/><BR/>Yet, I believe that people, once "uplifted" through education and experience to independently reason and consider the posibilities that lay before them, will make more good decisions than bad, and that our society is gradually self-correcting. (Back in the days of the founding fathers, they limited the vote to landowners - those who had training to understand the enlightement ideals. Now the vast majority of our society enjoy the tools and abilities of self-determiniation once available only to the elite few. I have done the streetcorner 360 you recomended <A HREF="http://davidbrin.blogspot.com/2006/01/ritual-of-streetcorner-brins-exercise.html" REL="nofollow"> several months back</A>, and I am sold.<BR/><BR/>We have exported these memes worldwide, and they continue to circulate. Though the paranoia meme is scary, and does appeal to a primitive part of our brain that is evoltionaraly wired to be wary of the unknown; my bet is still on the massive prefrontal lobes who's skill and curiosity have regularly and more rapidly improved our situation by replicating increasingly effective and productive memes.<BR/><BR/>I consider the paranoiac meme self-defeating. Fear tends to feed on itself. Still, I'd rather we didn't have to learn the hard way. And to avoid that, I am willing to talk, and debate, and spread (and encourage the further spreading) of modernist/rational memes actively in my life. Not only a lot more productive and positive than dying, but a lot less unpleasant too.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-1158027449762958932006-09-11T19:17:00.000-07:002006-09-11T19:17:00.000-07:00Okay, could you tell me, specifically, what parts ...<I>Okay, could you tell me, specifically, what parts David's definition of "modernism" you disagree with? I'm refering to what David said here:<BR/><BR/>"We believe in a notion that nearly all human societies deemed both mad and dangerous in the past... and still do in many lands... the improvability and (gradual) perfectibility of human individuals and societies through hard work, increasing knowledge, good will and citokate.</I><BR/><BR/>a) Human nature is what it is and I seriously doubt that it will change any time in the near future. we can and we will build better Gizmos but it will not change what we are.<BR/><BR/><I>"Moreover, we see that our parents and grandparents, who shared this mad dream, strove hard toward achieving it... and that they somewhat SUCCEEDED.<BR/><BR/>"Their efforts weren't wasted. They weren't fools."<BR/></I><BR/><BR/>No, they weren't fools, but their children were, the generation that survived the depression && WWII created one of the fairest & best run societies on the Planet, their children are working very hard at undoing their hard work and are very likely to succeed in taking us back to the 1880's. <BR/><BR/><I>If "modernism" is bunk, what is the alternative? What do you suggest?</I><BR/><BR/>Balance of Power! In Goverment the legislative, judicial and legislative branch keep each other in check, in society at large, goverment, labor & capital keep each other in check and in foreign affairs Countries keep each other in check, a new version of the concert of Europe where the players instead of being European powers are Global powers, China, India, Russia, EU, US, Brazil, keeping each other in check.Don Quijotehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03355584994080980478noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-1157998873991530392006-09-11T11:21:00.000-07:002006-09-11T11:21:00.000-07:00NoOne, you hit on the key point.I have often been ...NoOne, you hit on the key point.<BR/><BR/>I have often been accused of incredible naivete because of my "optimism" about the power of enlightenment processes and my belief in human improvability. And yet, I cannot say that these beliefs are rooted in optimism, at all.<BR/><BR/>Rather, I grew up steeped in history (even more than science or art), a tale which is a long litany of absolutely horrible behaviors by wretched and stupid human animals. The more you learn about (for example) the relentless way that we return to bad habits of feudalism, romanticism, incantory justification, predation, rationalization... <BR/><BR/>...the more cynical you are tempted to become. Especially seeing all of the same character traits in your neighbors. Especially when looking in a mirror and seeing them in yourself! It all seems so hopeless. That is, until...<BR/><BR/>...until you (if you are an honest person) stop for a moment and blink and realize that DESPITE ALL THAT, something new has started happening. Something new and better.<BR/><BR/>What makes me optimistic is that something better is happening, despite human nature and the wretched weight of all those horrid habits. My life has been spent trying to understand this new thing. <BR/><BR/>(Some basic observations are at:<BR/>http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B000EOU4S0)<BR/><BR/>Imagine you are watching a talk show, and on stage comes a TALKING DOG... who jokes with the host with a pronounced growling LISP. Is the interesting thing the defect, the speech impediment? No, the amazing thing is that you are looking at a talking dog!<BR/><BR/>That is how we should look at this Great Experiment. It may end tomorrow (many on the far right and far left and far-weird and far nasty are trying very hard). But while it lasts, it is the greatest thing in human history. Maybe the greatest in the history of this galaxy. I plan to die defending it.David Brinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14465315130418506525noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-1157990368836937682006-09-11T08:59:00.000-07:002006-09-11T08:59:00.000-07:00David Brin saidRomantics only understand on-off. C...David Brin said<BR/><I>Romantics only understand on-off. Complete acceptance of the catechism....Only total incantation of the full party line counts.</I><BR/><BR/>But why? Surely, there must be some aspect of human nature that resists process oriented thinking and clings to obsolete absolutes (with apologies to Neil Peart). Why can't more people see the progression from clans to tribes to feudal states to imperialist empires to modernist empires to a worldcentric civilization based on progress. We are so clearly headed there. And yet nearly everyone seems to have gone stark raving mad these days.NoOnehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08685249095572192084noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-1157988821660846812006-09-11T08:33:00.000-07:002006-09-11T08:33:00.000-07:00Anon,"Is Italy really a democracy?"Try addressing ...Anon,<BR/><BR/>"Is Italy really a democracy?"<BR/><BR/>Try addressing the meat of Dr. Brin's posts, or mine, or anyone else's. The No True Scotsman fallacy neither buttresses your contention (whatever that may be since it bears no relevance to the rest of this discussion), nor diminishes ours.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-1157968275811718472006-09-11T02:51:00.000-07:002006-09-11T02:51:00.000-07:00Interesting link on Japan, anon. I've never looke...Interesting link on Japan, anon. I've never looked at Japanese politics that closely, but I've never considered them a democracy.<BR/><BR/>I hate to be thought of as cynical...<BR/><BR/>I just see the ghost of Richard Feynman pointing at everything America has done in the last decade or so and saying...<BR/><BR/>"Cargo Cult."Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-1157962629139023212006-09-11T01:17:00.000-07:002006-09-11T01:17:00.000-07:00What democracies has Pax Americana produced?Uh.......<EM>What democracies has Pax Americana produced?<BR/><BR/>Uh.... Japan, Germany, Italy, Poland, Mongolia... I invite people to continue the list yourselves. I haven't the time and I've lost interest in being accused of everything possible, rather that see my points addressed with the curiosity that befits modern minds.</EM><BR/><BR/><BR/>Japan -- Chalmers Johnson and others would take issue with your assessment there... ...http://tomdispatch.com/index.mhtml?pid=81088<BR/><BR/>Poland -- I think Pope John Paul II had more to with that than the U.S.<BR/><BR/>Italy -- is Italy really a democracy. Seems like its ruled by organized crime syndicates who buy their way into power (wait a second, that seems to work here too...) and corruption, according to many, is rampant...<BR/><BR/>Germany, I suppose I'll give you that one, though I haven't studied much on German affiars post WWII...Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-1157953051698998052006-09-10T22:37:00.000-07:002006-09-10T22:37:00.000-07:00Wow!From "Lefty" to "dogmatic-romantic personality...Wow!<BR/><BR/>From "Lefty" to "dogmatic-romantic personality type."<BR/><BR/>Is that a promotion?<BR/><BR/>Quite a Frist-like remote diagnosis.<BR/><BR/>I was just trying to say that someone who calls anyone who criticizes Israel a Nazi might not be as enlightened as they think they are...Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-1157950639039498252006-09-10T21:57:00.000-07:002006-09-10T21:57:00.000-07:00Why do I bother?The groups I think you consider ab...Why do I bother?<BR/><BR/><I>The groups I think you consider above criticism:<BR/><BR/>1. Israel<BR/>2. Scientists<BR/>3. U.S. military<BR/>4. Pax Americana in general</I><BR/><BR/>Of course he knows that this is a diorect and diametric falsehood, a knowing and deliberate lie.<BR/><BR/>So why say it?<BR/><BR/>Because despite the fact that there is dismetric disproof in my very words, within this very thread, he MUST say these things and actually believe them.<BR/><BR/>Really, what he calls ad hominem attacks really are attempts to point out what I consider to be a FASCINATING problem in human nature and personality. <BR/><BR/>The dogmatic-romantic personality type really is unable to contemplate the existence of complex or nuanced opinion-sets outside of rigid incantory premises.<BR/><BR/>I really thank M for this demonstration. Moreover, let me say to him that this attitude of mine should NOT be viewed as utter rejection... (though it is certainly within the range of possible reactions to call it patronizing!) (mea culpa!)<BR/><BR/>He remains welcome here. I only wish the REASONS why he is still welcome here were as plain to him as it is to some of the rest of us. I am done on this thread.David Brinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14465315130418506525noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-1157948747829273832006-09-10T21:25:00.000-07:002006-09-10T21:25:00.000-07:00To come against all sides here, I'll give Monkyboy...To come against all sides here, I'll give Monkyboy a point in that the US can't take responsibiity for Poland or really the rest of the East Bloc, except by the slimmest of considerations in that the USSR collapsed in the first place. <BR/><BR/>However, defending David, if you read his other essays there aren't ANY groups or countries that he doesn't criticize. I don't know where the reference to Israel came from, since I think the only time I've ever seen him mention it on this site or davidbrin.com is in this particular discssion, and the only reason to bring it up is to point out the hypocrisy of the left on the subject of that country.<BR/><BR/>Pax Americana rebuilt Europe, Japan, and Korea REGARDLESS of whether or not the US saw benefit to the project (sure, we built up markets so we could sell our stuff... that didn't quite work out). If you want to argue ad nauseum that any hint of self interest betrays altruism, then even St. Francis has to be crucified as selfish, since being altruistic made him feel good. <BR/><BR/>Pax Americana did make messes in Latin America and Southeast Asia, sure. I don't dispute that. But Latin America was already messed up and they were quite happily killing each other regardless of our policies; we simply helped out. Geopolitically, it made sense since we didn't want Soviet satellites close to us. Remember, the USSR had promised to "bury" us. <BR/><BR/>Modernism means not applying such litmus tests. What David is saying is that while the US has made mistakes, which you have brought up (Allende, et al), that does not take away the fact that the Chinese economy now, the German and Japanese earlier, and now Hungary and Turkey are largely if not entirely because of the US and our spending habits - and these have been DELIBERATE policy choices. <BR/><BR/>For Mossadeq, there's Bosnia. For Allende, there's Korea. For Nicaragua, Japan. For El Salvador, Germany. For Iraq, there's Western Europe, China, the fall of the USSR, the collapse of Apartheid, the Internet(!), the UN. <BR/><BR/>Standards of living around the world are rising, for a variety of reasons, many of those reasons a result of American policies. Costa Rica has no army, in part because they can count on American defense. Similar with Western Europe. Other countries can afford to invest in their people and foreign aid because OUR military protects them. The meteoric rise of the Chinese economy is entirely the result of American consumption. Japan and Korea previously benefited thus. Taiwan's very existence as "independent" is due to Pax Americana.<BR/><BR/>No one is suggesting that everything is perfect, or that the US is the St. Nicholas to the child-nations of the world. But the single-minded focus on US imperialism, particularly taken out-of-context (compared to previous empires) is to ignore the dynamic benevolence the US is responsible for.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-1157947137125832612006-09-10T20:58:00.000-07:002006-09-10T20:58:00.000-07:00DQ, if you're so diametrically opposed to what Dav...DQ, if you're so diametrically opposed to what David claims, so much that nothing he can say to you is right...<BR/><BR/>Why bother? Why not just go be his enemy somewhere? <BR/><BR/>Ohyeah, almost forgot, you both share a loathing for G.W. Bush. <BR/><BR/>Well, fine, stay on that account, but *try*, please, to come up with rejoinders that are a bit cleverer than simple repetition fallacy.Rob Perkinshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13115249244056328076noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-1157946620639947112006-09-10T20:50:00.000-07:002006-09-10T20:50:00.000-07:00I'll give you Japan, but their idea of "democracy"...I'll give you Japan, but their idea of "democracy" seems to be on the same level as Iran's.<BR/><BR/>Germany and Italy already had democracy...Hitler was <I>elected</I> after all.<BR/><BR/>The idea the the U.S. turned Poland into a democracy is rather laughable...<BR/><BR/>I think we are all in agreement on the idea of accountability here...but we all seem to have groups that we think should be excluded.<BR/><BR/>Dr. Brin,<BR/><BR/>The groups I <I>think</I> you consider above criticism:<BR/><BR/>1. Israel<BR/>2. Scientists<BR/>3. U.S. military<BR/>4. <I>Pax Americana</I> in generalAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-1157946133360066472006-09-10T20:42:00.000-07:002006-09-10T20:42:00.000-07:00Don Quijote said:"To paraphrase Henry Ford, Modern...Don Quijote said:<BR/><I>"To paraphrase Henry Ford, Modernism is BUNK."</I><BR/><BR/>Okay, could you tell me, specifically, what parts David's definition of "modernism" you disagree with? I'm refering to what David said here:<BR/><BR/><I>"We believe in a notion that nearly all human societies deemed both mad and dangerous in the past... and still do in many lands... the improvability and (gradual) perfectibility of human individuals and societies through hard work, increasing knowledge, good will and citokate.<BR/><BR/>"Moreover, we see that our parents and grandparents, who shared this mad dream, strove hard toward achieving it... and that they somewhat SUCCEEDED.<BR/><BR/>"Their efforts weren't wasted. They weren't fools."</I><BR/><BR/>And could you also tell me what can be done given the current situation now in the US and the world in general? Are we all doomed, or is there a possible, plausible solution you see we can put in action?<BR/><BR/>If "modernism" is bunk, what is the alternative? What do you suggest?Big Chttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02475844932543383723noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-1157945365288664372006-09-10T20:29:00.000-07:002006-09-10T20:29:00.000-07:00Modernism is much more a PERSONALITY TRAIT than a ...<I>Modernism is much more a PERSONALITY TRAIT than a specific program.</I><BR/>To paraphrase Henry Ford, Modernism is BUNK. <BR/><BR/><BR/>What dictatorships has Pax Americana produced?<BR/><BR/>Uh.... Guatemala, Nicaragua , El Salvador, Chile, Argentina, Egypt, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, Iraq, Pakistan, Indonesia... I invite people to continue the list yourselves. I haven't the time and I've lost interest in being accused of everything possible, rather that see my points addressed with the curiosity that befits modern minds.Don Quijotehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03355584994080980478noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-1157943540371771592006-09-10T19:59:00.000-07:002006-09-10T19:59:00.000-07:00What democracies has Pax Americana produced?Uh.......What democracies has Pax Americana produced?<BR/><BR/>Uh.... Japan, Germany, Italy, Poland, Mongolia... I invite people to continue the list yourselves. I haven't the time and I've lost interest in being accused of everything possible, rather that see my points addressed with the curiosity that befits modern minds.David Brinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14465315130418506525noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-1157933419084920072006-09-10T17:10:00.000-07:002006-09-10T17:10:00.000-07:00Just a few factual corrections first for Don Quixo...Just a few factual corrections first for Don Quixote's litany: Arbenz was overthrown in '54, and Allende in '73.<BR/><BR/>For Monkeyboy's allegation that the "brown people" in America's "Micro-Imperialism" have no chance of challenging their exploitation: go tell that to Carlos Slim Helu, Lakshmi Mittal, Li Ka-Shing, and Azim Premji, and then tell it to the hundreds of millions of other wealthy or middle-class college graduates from among America's "developing world" trading partners.<BR/><BR/>And as for its persecutors having no chance of being prosecuted for that exploitation, such as for the Bhopal disaster, I am right now looking out my window at a building two blocks away that includes the office of Mike Ciresi, who acted as counsel to the government of India in winning a half-billion dollar settlement from Union Carbide.<BR/><BR/>Granted, although that is a lot of money, it is chump change relative to the magnitude of the disaster. But the point is, however imperfectly it works at present, the U.S. has a system in place in which foreign interests can regularly challenge U.S. entities in U.S. courts, where judges follow U.S. laws to rule against U.S. entities without regard to "imperial" allegiance. And in both America and its developing world trading partners, both the concern for and ability to deal a greater share of economic benefits more fairly to ground-level workers on both sides, have generally been rising over the decades.<BR/><BR/>Both are currently threatened too at present, by factors from Team Bush's commitment to directing all economic benefit to the wealthiest few, to the new leftist embrace of wholesale trade protectionism (so much for the left being the champions of international solidarity) - both factors that need to be rejected if the rise of the global middle class is to continue.<BR/><BR/>As for a working definition of a modernist, I would take it as someone who recognizes and applies to all areas of human activity and inquiry the modes of investigation that have proven themselves in physics and astronomy, since Kepler and Galileo, to be spectacularly superior at understanding the world around us, i.e. logical, analytical, skeptical reasoning based on and repeatedly confirmable in varied settings by objective evidence, while actively searching out and honestly considering rationally compelling alternative explanations and criticism.<BR/><BR/>For working definitions of opponents to modernism, I would start with anyone who disagrees with the above assessment because it fails to flatter their preconceived axioms, or those who dispute that the above assessment is cold and seems to admit no room for human feeling, based on that commonest of logical fallacies that what an individual finds comforting or satisfying has anything to do with determining objective facts.Shazam McShotgunsteinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06534263481174626345noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-1157932629639286202006-09-10T16:57:00.000-07:002006-09-10T16:57:00.000-07:00Hehe,Once again with the ad hominem attacks and th...Hehe,<BR/><BR/>Once again with the <I>ad hominem</I> attacks and the cryptic accusations?<BR/><BR/>So America has tried to brand itself the Benevolent Empire! <BR/><BR/>Where's the proof?<BR/><BR/><I>Pax Britannica</I>, loosely defined, produced such democracies as India, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, South Africa, Pakistan and even...The United States of America itself. <BR/><BR/>What has America produced?<BR/><BR/>Take the case of Iraq:<BR/><BR/>The most obvious question that should be put to a vote of the people in our newly calved "democracy" is:<BR/><BR/><I>Should American troops pull out of Iraq?</I><BR/><BR/>Odds that America will <I>ever</I> let anyone besides our corrupt puppets answer that question?<BR/><BR/>Zero.<BR/><BR/>And I have a feeling that Ken Lay is smiling from wherever he is, at the sight of $200 million a day worth of oil revenue disappearing into hungry pockets of those who are busy bringing "enlightenment" to Iraq...Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-1157930823678910682006-09-10T16:27:00.000-07:002006-09-10T16:27:00.000-07:00Yup, notice folks how the romantic personality mus...Yup, notice folks how the romantic personality must apply its own values to opposition. Whereas I have addressed many of his issues, and he has addressed absolutely none of mine, he take my criticism of that fact as repression...<BR/><BR/>...then commences yet again to rant incantatory catechisms of the left, like a frantic priest throwing holy water at some creature he does not understand.<BR/><BR/>Moreover, he is not even INTERESTED in the process aspects of all of this. The aspects of personality and perception. Even though I have made this the focus of several postings.<BR/><BR/>Indeed, it is the only part of this topic that remains of interest to me. <BR/><BR/>And even that much is becoming tediously boring, since all I ever get is ever more frantic moralistic cant. Yes, it illustrates my point. But so?<BR/><BR/>For the record, all accusations of imperialism - micro or otherwise, - shrug off of me like rain off a teflon duck. I have fought against evil of all types, all my life and stand up for the only process that has ever given people hope. The Enlightenment. If it survives, all the problems that these two dogmatists yammer about will eventually be solved.<BR/><BR/>If it doesn't then either they will get croaked or become our commie masters. No other outcome suits the desire of romanticism.David Brinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14465315130418506525noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-1157928407355656742006-09-10T15:46:00.000-07:002006-09-10T15:46:00.000-07:00Dr. Brin,I''m sure you see yourself as a rational,...Dr. Brin,<BR/><BR/>I''m sure you see yourself as a rational, enlightened person, but I find your arguments not much different than the Bushites you claim to despise.<BR/><BR/>Take your comment on those who disagree with Israel:<BR/><BR/><I>But that back and forth isn't what the neo-Hitlers of Europe (and America's left) want. They want an excuse to despise and hate the greatest victims of hatred of all time.</I><BR/><BR/>In other words: Dissent = Treason.<BR/><BR/>There couldn't possibly be any rational reason to question the way Israel has treated the Palestinians and the Lebanese, therefore...these people must just hate Jews.<BR/><BR/>And your defense of <I>Pax Americana</I>:<BR/><BR/><I>The value system of actually hypothesizing that empires even remotely can or ought to behave altruistically.</I><BR/><BR/>This reminds me of the Bushie argument that goes...Sure, we've killed a lot of Iraqi civilians, but Saddam would have killed more, so...it's okay.<BR/><BR/>I don't deny that <I>Pax Americana</I> has been operated under a rather unique umbrella policy that at least pays lip service to altruism...but below that umbrella, I see something else rather unique:<BR/><BR/>Micro-Imperialism.<BR/><BR/>Corporations or individuals associated with America exploiting the hell out of the "little brown people" we claim to be bringing enlightenment to.<BR/><BR/>The exploited have no chance to challenge this exploitation, the exploiters have no chance of being prosecuted for it.<BR/><BR/>In a few very public cases, like the Bhopal disaster, a few dollars are spinkled on the little brown people (most of it probably taken by corrupt local officials) to "make things right."<BR/><BR/>If America was truly an altruistic empire, we would have long ago set up a system where those who are being exploited can have their day in court, and the exploited have a real chance of facing justice for what they have done.<BR/><BR/>Instead, those little brown people are forced to seek justice with the help of a few "leftie" organizations and the press...Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-1157926276912217502006-09-10T15:11:00.000-07:002006-09-10T15:11:00.000-07:00NoOne, you tried and it was a good effort. But yo...NoOne, you tried and it was a good effort. But you need to step back a bit.<BR/><BR/>Modernism is much more a PERSONALITY TRAIT than a specific program. We believe in a notion that nearly all human societies deemed both mad and dangerous in the past... and still do in many lands... the improvability and (gradual) perfectibility of human individuals and societies through hard work, increasing knowledge, good will and citokate.<BR/><BR/>Moreover, we see that our parents and grandparents, who shared this mad dream, strove hard toward achieving it... and that they somewhat SUCCEEDED. <BR/><BR/>Their efforts weren't wasted. They weren't fools.<BR/><BR/>The dogmatic/romantic personality cannot abide this notion. They cling to "eternal verities" and cynicism and the comfort of incantations. Romanticism relies utterly upon certain Campbellian tropes like the notion of a fall from a state of grace. Hence (a majority of) Libertarians -- supposedly modernistic -- are in fact among the MOST romantic and anti modern groups around!<BR/><BR/>On a practical level, this personality trait became UN-insane at the time of John Locke and Adam Smith, when some old ideas discussed by Pericles were given another try. All the things you mention, like democracy, are not sacred in themselves. But they - and open markets and science, etc - were found to be fantastic new tools for impleementing Preicles's dream.<BR/><BR/>A dream of curbing our inner, predatory devils NOT with Hobbes's coercion-from-above, but with the new method of reciprocal accountability. Where we police EACH OTHER mostly, and let our other sides, our angels, cooperate and compete more freely than ever before.<BR/><BR/>Horrifically imprefect, this method has nevertheless succeeded in 200 years better than 99% of human history did with its horrid tribes and feudalisms. The Enlightenment started out with help from some romantics, but they turned on it, as soon as they saw its power and success. And they have been attacking it ever since.<BR/><BR/>Marxists and Nazis and Rand-droids and mystics and plutocrats and all of their ilk. They are incapable of understanding the Enlightenment, as a matter of basic personality. Hence it fills them with loathing and they clutch at incantations in order to dismiss it.<BR/><BR/>Notice how Quijote once AGAIN evaded the challenge. He is simply incapable of discussing MY points. He can only return again and again to his own. And no matter how often I show that I understand his complaints, nothing I say will ever be enough.<BR/><BR/>Romantics only understand on-off. Complete acceptance of the catechism. If I wrote an LONG rant against the crimes against Mossadegh and Allende and Nicaragua, but mentioned ONE item like the low arms expenditures and 150 years of peace in Latin America, I would still be outside the tent. Only total incantation of the full party line counts.<BR/><BR/>Do you see what we're up against? Human nature is so insidious that HALF OF THE ENLIGHTENMENT failed... the Franco-European half. With Hegel and Sartre and all their utter bullshit nonsense about "reason" they got suckered back down the paths of Platonism, turning thier branch into one more version of romanticism.<BR/><BR/>It is a frail thing that made us, that created the Wilsonian idealism <I>that Quijote now spouts without noticing or caring about the irony of where it comes from!</I><BR/><BR/>It is a frail thing. It is under attack from a huge fraction of humanity that is incapable of getting it, even when they have benefited all their lives.David Brinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14465315130418506525noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-1157922033361587572006-09-10T14:00:00.000-07:002006-09-10T14:00:00.000-07:00To quijote:I'll take a crack at defining modernism...To quijote:<BR/><BR/>I'll take a crack at defining modernism and perhaps David could set up a wiki where the word modernism is hashed out by many.<BR/><BR/>For me, modernism stands (at minimum) for i) separation of church and state, ii) rule of law, iii) open democratic process with elected officials (at all levels) and iv) an independent media. So, on this count, Iran for example fails on i) and iv) at the very least. Others will have different non-negotiable items - separation of legislative, judicial and executive branches for instance, freedom of speech, etc.<BR/><BR/>I'm not sure what you're going to gain by proving that the US was involved in more than just 3 coups (as David suggests). You keep looking at the US through an empire lens while he looks at it thro' a modernist lens. So, for every Iran, you'll have a South Korea, for Haiti you'll have Taiwan, for Nicaragua you'll have Malaysia and Singapore etc. Why do you only look at the negative aspects of the US? After all, if the Nazis had the internet, you'd have been rounded up by now.NoOnehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08685249095572192084noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-1157917596627665202006-09-10T12:46:00.000-07:002006-09-10T12:46:00.000-07:00Except that I have proved myself perfectly willing...<I>Except that I have proved myself perfectly willing to discuss crimes and mistakes committed by PA, from Mossadegh to Nicaragua (three times across a hundred years).</I><BR/><BR/>Only thrice over a century? You'll have to let me know what they were...<BR/><BR/><BR/><A HREF="http://www.amazon.com/Overthrow-America-Century-Regime-Hawaii/dp/0805078614/ref=pd_bxgy_b_text_b/103-3183712-3191041?ie=UTF8" REL="nofollow">Overthrow: America's Century of Regime Change from Hawaii to Iraq (Hardcover) by Stephen Kinzer </A> only discusses 14 coups, you'll have to let me know which 11 countries got their just deserts.Don Quijotehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03355584994080980478noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-1157909071851012492006-09-10T10:24:00.000-07:002006-09-10T10:24:00.000-07:00NoOne is right about talking past each other. Exc...NoOne is right about talking past each other. Except for this. Except that I have proved myself perfectly willing to discuss crimes and mistakes committed by PA, from Mossadegh to Nicaragua (three times across a hundred years).<BR/><BR/>Meanwhile, Q&M are completely unable to acknowledge that. Nor can they take in my counter examples and discuss them. It's not possible because to admit the counter-examples would be to admit that something can be fixed, by pragmatically learning how to increase the incidence of good things and decrease the incidence of bad ones.<BR/><BR/>This cannot be discussed because it is - as I have said - vastly more a matter of personality than it is of geopolitics or even facts. <BR/><BR/>Note that not a whit of attention was paid to the aspect I raised of looking at the sweep of history. <BR/><BR/>Nor something even more fundamental... the valuye system against which they are judging Pax Americana... a value system that would have got them locked away as utterly delusional in any other era. The value system of actually hypothesizing that empires even remotely can or ought to behave altruistically.<BR/><BR/>It happens that I agree with that value system! I fight, every day of my life, for it to come true.<BR/><BR/>The difference is that I see that as a NEW thing, (which it is) and an accomplishment to keep steadily moving toward. But, as romantics, they can only see it as an idealized state of grace from which we have FALLEN.<BR/><BR/>1. despite recent events, the macroscopic trends of history show upward and not downward moral trends<BR/><BR/>2. this imagined state of grace is wholly a product of myths and mythos spread BY this civilization. M&DQ are totally products of this mythic system. Fine. But to be unaware of it? To preach - based on American-romantic Wilsonian ideals and to ignore where they came from?<BR/><BR/>Non cognizant. Alas and sigh.David Brinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14465315130418506525noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-1157905758790516522006-09-10T09:29:00.000-07:002006-09-10T09:29:00.000-07:00Please give David Brin a break on Pax Americana (P...<I>Please give David Brin a break on Pax Americana (PA). </I><BR/>Why?<BR/><BR/><I>The US has created the first modernist (as opposed to imperialist) empire in world history and I think this modernist empire - almost a contradiction in terms - is why there's so much talking past each other between you guys and David.</I><BR/><BR/>Please Define the word <B>modernist</B>, cause I have a sneaking suspision that it's a whole lot like the conservative phrase "Family Values", it means what ever you want it to mean...<BR/> <BR/><I> While Brin emphasizes the modernist aspect, you guys emphasize the empire aspect.</I><BR/>Again, define Modernist.<BR/><BR/><BR/><I> I was raised in India (but have lived in the US for twenty years) and growing up, I was extremely puzzled by the US's support for Pakistan - a military dictatorship - and its hostility toward India. It took me a long time to understand that this hostility was due to India being outside the Empire.</I><BR/>Thank you for making my point about the Empire. What kind of goverment a country has is far less important than it's subversiance to US interest. As far as the US is concerned, a violent dictatorship which rules with an iron fist but does what the US wants is better than a Democracy which does not do what the US wants. <BR/><BR/><BR/><I>Now that the empire is crumbling, I think it is time for the US to emphasize its modernist aspect and move on from there.</I> <BR/>While it is fraying on the edges, it's not crumbling anywhere near as fast as you think it is! As long as NATO exists, the US Empire will survive.<BR/><BR/><I>This is what I hear David preaching over and over and over.</I><BR/>What I hear is David telling us that we are good guys, have good intentions and when bad things happen, it was an accident and this is where I am in absolute disaggreement with him. <BR/><BR/>Our empire is built on the same values (Might makes right) and with the same methods (War) other Empire were buit on. If we do something good like rebuilding Europe, Japan or Korea it's because it's in our self-interest. If we go to South America or the Middle East to plunder Natural Resources, it's because we can and it's in our interest.Don Quijotehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03355584994080980478noreply@blogger.com