The U.S., a.k.a. "Oops!" nation, does it again: After years of madness and torture and violating habeas corpus, the U.S. Supreme Court begins to restore the rule of law by invalidating parts of the Military Commissions Act. But what about those for whom the Court ruled too late?
Oops!
Ted,
ReplyDeleteAmericans have this incessant view that all wrongs will be vindicated in the ends when we are proven victorious and that all will be well. They think that no matter how bad we screw up, we can fix any problem.
On a micro level, this spirit can be beneficial in some circumstances. It encourages problem solving. On a structural level, however, it's disastrous.
This is what's behind John McCain's "we're never going to give up" attitude, and why it actually sways people; "eventually history will vindicate us!"
It's the same with market capitalism...."eventually the system averages out"..."in the long run it balances"
As Keynes said, in the long run we're all dead.
But this doesn't matter, because arrogant right wing assholes don't have time to stop and ponder that they might be wrong, and when posed with the question, they simply throw it back wherever it came from. The burden of proof is always on someone else's shoulders.
Incompetence, stupidity, and the long list of Anonymous comments you'll get pestering everything from my motives to my intellect....
this one came out fast. it's 'catch22', for real. tks
ReplyDeletePssst aggie, posting as aggie dude is no less anonymous than posting as "anonymous". OK back to your condescending posts.
ReplyDelete@anonymous 4:32-- LOL! my personal opinion re:aggie dork is that we should start a collection on here to raise $15K to allow him to tag along on stan trek 2009, provided that ted promises to ditch him in the bleakest region of pakistan, without any money (or internet access!). i think we could probably raise the cash by xmas if we really tried!
ReplyDeleteWhy don't you just raise that money and send it to me, and I'll shut up. If it's worth that much to you to silence uncomfortable voices, I'll go away.
ReplyDeleteWhat exactly in Aggie Dude's post do you object to, the writer? He's talkin' good sense there. Reread it a couple of times and let it percolate.
ReplyDeleteDude, If those people were able to raise the money it would go to the devil, and you'd still be stuck on the East side of the state. If they think getting you out of Detroit, and stranding you in the Stans, would be a dis-service they've not been downtown! Pussy's.
ReplyDeleteaggie, I think I finally see your point. The problem with me posting as anonymous is not that none of us are using our first and last names, but , rather, that I am not the only anonymous poster. This makes it hard for everyone to know who has said what. Like some liberal could start posting anonymously, not knowing I already have, and you would all think I have joined your side. Now, in this case, I actually have joined your side (not like tere actually are 'sides' per se, but you know what I mean)
ReplyDeleteSorry for being a thick-sculled idiot. I will use my brain in the future.
Aggie, you're mixing up "uncomfortable" with "annoying". Getting at the substance of your post, the little bit of free market the West has had for the past two centuries has been responsible for the improvement of living conditions throughout, to the point where current socialists nagging has to be about its profligacy.
ReplyDeleteContrast that to socialism - not the soft-core Scandinavian version, the in-your-face jackboot version of Eastern Europe, Cuba, Southeast Asia -, which has only brought about pain and misery wherever it took hold, by force, usually.
And then it's those odious "right-wingers" who are arrogant and can never admit to being wrong...
A blog really hasn't arrived without petty sniping, huh? Anonymous, I have to admit I disagree, albeit slightly. Differentiating yourself with a verified and unique name and POV is valuable as your opinions can be contextualized. As long as no one is stealing Aggie Dude's name, he's safe. (Although I think if he had a permanent login, that'd be something.) But clearly, a persistent identity is just part of involving yourself in credible debate.
ReplyDeleteIncitatus,
ReplyDeleteI think the point where our communication breaks down is precisely this point about what I think of when I think of socialism.
I think of Scandinavian or French democratic socialism. Not because I don't think that the totalitarianism of Eastern Europe, Cuba, China or the former USSR isn't bad, but that I don't see it as a consequence of socialism, but a lack of democracy.
The frustrating aspect for me is that Americans could so easily recognize this distinction and seem to choose not to. It's not just a little "free market," in the United States we literally have industry writing our legislation and politicians just grand standing as a front-stage performance to keep everyone distracted.
This goes for health care all the way to vehicle emissions standards.
This isn't just "a little free market," and I charge that it's got the same problem the communist countries have; no checks and balances, very little democracy.
So while our measured history of free market capitalism mixed with government oversight and regulation of key industries has produced enormous dividends, the whole-sale sell off of the public arena to private corporations.
This is not substantively different in my mind than the totalitarian countries you refer to. I don't see them as socialist, I see them as state capitalism, with party members as shareholders. In terms of its effect on the environment and on individuals, there is little difference in the amount of oppression institutions of state capitalism and institutions of multinational corporations.
Keep in mind also that colonialism was championed by joint stock companies with free reign to ravage land and peoples around the world. What I see now happening with Globalization is not too much different.
People here love to compare us to third world countries in an attempt to make liberals stop complaining. There is a reason why Western Europe is curiously missing from that debate...
ReplyDelete