I’m pretty sure the hundreds of millions of Native Americans who were slaughtered by the colonizers would have been fine with that.”
Surely they would have. If they had an opportunity to conquer Eastward, instead of vice versa, they eventually would have done so, and they would have been brutal, probably much more brutal than the British and Spanish and French and Dutch were when they got here. And we would all be worse off if that had happened. Thankfully the Europeans got here first.
I think Carl was afraid of his own shadow. He knew the old, blustery Carl who would say anything would get hinm in trouble, but he didn’t know what to do instead.
Biff,
I couldn’t find your post on this yesterday. Say more on what makes you think Jimmy is the What. Jimmy was sure rocking the handlebar mustache/double cottonball goatee combo. You think Mrs. Slopey would mind if I tried that look?
The basic flaw in Chomsky’s position, and any Marxist for that matter is their understanding of human nature.
He takes the easy position of moral certitude in a world where we are consistently reminded that no matter what form of governance man seems to develop, it usually ends in a self-destructive over-reach.
His arguments stand on a false premise; that the choice we have is between the inarguably moral idea that man lives best when resources are equally distributed for all against the notion of a sort of financial meritocracy which “trickles down” to those less fortunate or without the wearwithall to succeed in that society (whatever that may be defined as).
In reality the choice is a simple and stark one:
Which system of governance will kill less of the innocent?
Reading Noam Chomsky has a weird unintentional patriotism: the US is far more brilliant and tough than anyone else, and they’ve got everything figured out 10 steps ahead of everyone else.
Then you read memoirs and primary source documents from US leaders and it doesn’t appear that way. Things are much more happenstance in democracies; only dictatorships can really behave that way.
“If it weren’t for colonization here by the British and the Dutch we’d all still be living in teepees and hunting buffalo.”
OR living in tin roofed houses in Africa.
damn – sounds like i need more hos and ho-hos!
Ringo – I agree with you!
According to his website -Jimmy earned 3 bronze stars in Nam
“By Biff Champion on October 19, 2010 10:57 AM
I’m pretty sure the hundreds of millions of Native Americans who were slaughtered by the colonizers would have been fine with that.”
Surely they would have. If they had an opportunity to conquer Eastward, instead of vice versa, they eventually would have done so, and they would have been brutal, probably much more brutal than the British and Spanish and French and Dutch were when they got here. And we would all be worse off if that had happened. Thankfully the Europeans got here first.
Morning, all.
I think Carl was afraid of his own shadow. He knew the old, blustery Carl who would say anything would get hinm in trouble, but he didn’t know what to do instead.
Biff,
I couldn’t find your post on this yesterday. Say more on what makes you think Jimmy is the What. Jimmy was sure rocking the handlebar mustache/double cottonball goatee combo. You think Mrs. Slopey would mind if I tried that look?
I would not vote for you DH, because you do not have a huge rack and you never ran a successful hookery.
biff,
The basic flaw in Chomsky’s position, and any Marxist for that matter is their understanding of human nature.
He takes the easy position of moral certitude in a world where we are consistently reminded that no matter what form of governance man seems to develop, it usually ends in a self-destructive over-reach.
His arguments stand on a false premise; that the choice we have is between the inarguably moral idea that man lives best when resources are equally distributed for all against the notion of a sort of financial meritocracy which “trickles down” to those less fortunate or without the wearwithall to succeed in that society (whatever that may be defined as).
In reality the choice is a simple and stark one:
Which system of governance will kill less of the innocent?
Reading Noam Chomsky has a weird unintentional patriotism: the US is far more brilliant and tough than anyone else, and they’ve got everything figured out 10 steps ahead of everyone else.
Then you read memoirs and primary source documents from US leaders and it doesn’t appear that way. Things are much more happenstance in democracies; only dictatorships can really behave that way.
” Again, when US economic interests are threatened abroad, America demonizes the leader.”
This is exactly why almost everything I read in the main stream media about foreign leaders is taken with a grain of salt.