So who is the designated referee that will send in their own troops to evict people from their homes in an effort to make peace? — Harry Hindu
Guess I'll just shake my head and go elsewhere. — Banno
I hope everyone in British, Spanish, French, and other descended countries know the irony of the criticisms of imperialism. I guess it’s only ok if done before the 20th century? I believe Australia had a policy for “hunting” aborigine into the 20th century. Hey guys.. it's okay.. just "history" if done before the 20th century when YOUR ancestors benefited from it :lol:. You get to make up for it by being a human rights zealot now :roll:. — schopenhauer1
Though I see your point about this being silly, I do think it brings up a point I brought up earlier:
I hope everyone in British, Spanish, French, and other descended countries know the irony of the criticisms of imperialism. I guess it’s only ok if done before the 20th century? I believe Australia had a policy for “hunting” aborigine into the 20th century. Hey guys.. it's okay.. just "history" if done before the 20th century when YOUR ancestors benefited from it :lol:. You get to make up for it by being a human rights zealot now :roll:.
— schopenhauer1
We can add in asymmetric warfare along with imperialism in there too. Hey, keep going about your business. It's only those people that are committing X atrocities. MY history gets me to "realize" the errors others are making.. Meanwhile, keep eating your ice cream and enjoying that view. You deserve it. — schopenhauer1
That's "whataboutism." No one stands higher on a pile of bones and souls than does my own U.S., including all the denial and lack of contrition or reparation. But if what was wrong then is wrong now, two wrongs don't make it right. One might say the U.S. lacks moral authority to counsel one party or another in a conflict, but the U.S. has 100% moral authority to refrain from funding one side or the other. — James Riley
I just think it's an interesting thing that Western countries take a high ground after a certain establishment has been met.. I would say around WW2, one of the worst of atrocities. — schopenhauer1
In other words, "We're cool with the arrangement now.. Germany got their war-thing out of their system..America has manifest destiny, Britain has its social welfare and common wealth, America is basically backing the world's security so others can have their social welfare program.. Australia has its country, all the players in place" So NOW is the time to call foul.. Right NOW, no no, right NOW. — schopenhauer1
Yeah, I'm just looking at it from the 3D perspective. The message seems to be, "You should have done X, Y, Z deeds prior to the 20th century (or at least WW2), otherwise you are SOL. Meanwhile, I'm going to lick my ice cream and enjoy my view from the history that we were able to accomplish. How convenient this all turned out". — schopenhauer1
There has always been a disconnect between aspirational idealism, and might-makes-right. If we were to allow the track record of the latter to inform or influence the former, then there would be no former. We would not be allowed to learn from history, or we would only take the lessons from it that current wrong actors are taking from it now: "Hey, the U.S. did it and it worked, so . . ." — James Riley
All I'm saying is, the U.S. doesn't have to fund it. Giving $3.8b per year in military aid to a nuclear superpower so it can defend itself against a stateless territory with no air force, army or navy is $3.8b we could use here. It's not unlike the waste in response to 9/11. — James Riley
I mean, these seem like stupid questions only because of the fog of historical perspective. — schopenhauer1
Seems you misunderstood. Oh, well. — Banno
this — schopenhauer1
but then used it as a jumping off point to point out the interesting case of those who benefit from nations built before the 20th century and those sort of "going through history" into the 21st century — schopenhauer1
Your plan involves a lot of loading, unloading, shipping, and dumping debris into the Marianas Trench. Too much trouble. It would be easier to just nuke the Temple Mount, then everyone everywhere could share its alleged holiness. And while we're at it, might as well get rid of several other centers of superstition and nonsense. Everyone can make up their own lists--but let's keep to under 10 nukes in all. — Bitter Crank
Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.