Open Thread


What's Your Take? Leave a Comment

Leave a Reply

  1. Again, just to draw out the difference between law and history:

    LAW: I had to steal a loaf of bread because, if I didn’t, my family would starve. The law does not care about alternatives. The law says go to jai.

    HISTORY: We chose to let Germany exhaust itself killing Russians and French so we could have an advantage when we fought them. You don’t just go look up the law or some other norm to decide whether this was appropriate, you ask yourself what the world would have looked like if we had chosen differently. You have to consider the “fiction” that MM casually dismisses.

  2. Look at it based on what standards? Certainly not those shaped by western European influence via colonization. There are few countries in this world that haven’t adopted many of the norms imposed on them via colonization. Most people aren’t sophisticated enough in thought to speculate on such things without coloring it with their own experiences.

  3. Every alternative that didn’t actually happen is speculative, ishtar. But that doesn’t mean alternatives should not be examined as the basis for historical judgment.

    Was it appropriate to drop the bomb on hiroshima?

    Should we have entered the First World War?

    Should Lincoln have declared war on the South?

    The answer to each question very much depends on an examination of alternative paths. You have to look at the “fiction” that never was.

  4. In real estate news, my family was considering a move to Westchester a few years back. I still have the broker listings pop up in my google reader and WHOA am I glad we didn’t do that. Things that we were looking at in the 800-1mm range (taxes 20k and up) are now asking 600 and are sitting on the market. Those people must be freaking.

1 50 51 52 53 54 69