<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html;charset=ISO-8859-1">
<title></title>
</head>
<body>
Lee Corbin wrote:<br>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid003f01c71cdd$96cf59f0$6801a8c0@homeef7b612677">
<pre wrap="">Mike writes
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">[Thomas wrote]
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">Lee Corbin wrote:
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">I may not choose to dispute that the Bush/neocon position is what
you'd call evil. But I would suggest that it may be expedient, and
that failing to take a strong stand against enemies is, in the long
run, suicide.
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap="">Lee: If we're so smart, why must we revert to brutality in dealing
with brutes? -- Thomas
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap="">Perhaps because brutes fail to be swayed by marketing?
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap=""><!---->
Right, Mike, but your "brutes" not swayed by either marketing or *any*
other civilized expedient. Woe be unto him who tries negotiating in any
civilized fashion with them.</pre>
</blockquote>
In any contest between the rational and the irrational (Rand pointed out),
the irrational has dominated unless the terms of the contest were clearly
defined, in which case the rational wins.<br>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid003f01c71cdd$96cf59f0$6801a8c0@homeef7b612677">
<pre wrap="">The Geneva Convention, for example, was expressedly designed to
rely upon the civilized conventions of modern advanced nations. It's
the ultimate in foolhardiness for highly civilized nations to abide by it when the brutes are cutting people's heads off in the most painful,
barbaric, and horrific manner that they can devise.</pre>
</blockquote>
Sacrificing the clearly defined terms has guaranteed the victory of brutality.
Without conventions, constitutions, objective laws it was the more consistently
irrational that won. <br>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid003f01c71cdd$96cf59f0$6801a8c0@homeef7b612677">
<pre wrap="">This has always been a fatal flaw in the Western psyche and in Western
traditions. Barbaric mobsters were able to take over many neighborhoods
in Chicago and New York in the 1920s and 30s simply because the
civilized law-abiding people of Illinois and New York State could not
understand that the circumstances were no longer as the American founders assumed.</pre>
</blockquote>
I agree with Samantha. Government interference with free trade created a
market for barbarism.
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid003f01c71cdd$96cf59f0$6801a8c0@homeef7b612677">
<pre wrap="">San Francisco, on the other hand, behaved much more appropriately in
1850 when lawless and uncivilized men subborned the legal process,
bribing officials, judges, juries and so on in a manner to be reenacted by Al Capone and his ilk. But the people of San Francisco would have none of it, and mounted the finest vigilante effort I know of. They arose en masse, rounded up the perpetrators, gave them quick but fair trials with no appeal, and hung most of them forthwith. And civilization was restored.</pre>
</blockquote>
I admire that sort of initiative and applaud the establishment of justice.
If our protectors fail us let us protect ourselves. But how? As a lynch
mob? Can't we do a little better? Were the judges and juries hanged too?
What caused them to take bribes? With foresight we can choose the path
that doesn't lead to barbarism.<br>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid003f01c71cdd$96cf59f0$6801a8c0@homeef7b612677">
<pre wrap="">The "brutes" had to be hanged or shot, you understand. And if Thomas thinks that this is "brutal", then let him cheer as society crumbles in south central Los Angeles and other places---all quite legally. Let the gangs rule: many people, probably including Thomas, prefer gangs like those of Al Capone or the Cribs to be in control, to the "brutal" repression of such that is necessary by civlized men.</pre>
</blockquote>
I would characterize this as an irrational belief in the efficacy of violent
justice. I understand that "big brother" is supposed to keep us safe from
all the "little brothers," but as we approach the singularity, I feel it's
time we got serious about establishing a non coercive society. <br>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid003f01c71cdd$96cf59f0$6801a8c0@homeef7b612677">
<pre wrap="">All that seems to matter to some people is that their own government play by all the niceties, no matter what ultimate loathsome consequences obtain, and that their own hands remain lily-white. </pre>
</blockquote>
: ) Lee, when's the last time you gunned down a mobster? I don't think government
niceties are the answer, but I'm not willing to toss out the Bill of Rights
just because a crime was committed.
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid003f01c71cdd$96cf59f0$6801a8c0@homeef7b612677">
<pre wrap="">Evil triumphs when good men do nothing.</pre>
</blockquote>
Evil doesn't triumph. It defeats itself. So don't be evil. Do something
good! -- Thomas<br>
<br>
</body>
</html>