[extropy-chat] letter concerning presidential growth

[Joseph Bloch]

I'm gonna toss this one out to the moderators.

Do you really want a no-holds-barred discussion on George W Bush and the 
Iraq War? I will indulge in such, but be aware, it has the potential to 
get ugly and suck up lots and lots of bandwidth. But I do not think 
allowing such statements to go unchallenged is in anyone's interests.

Thus do I seek the moderators' blessing before I engage.

Joseph

Brett Paatsch wrote:

> Adrian Tymes wrote:
>
>> --- Brett Paatsch <bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au> wrote:
>>
>>> If I cannot hold America as a whole responsible for what America does
>>> in the world then who can I hold responsible?
>>
>>
>> Those Americans who actually implement that which you would
>> assign responsibility for.  America is not one giant whole, and
>> if you treat it as such for the purposes of declaring enemies,
>> you make a lot of enemies out of those who might otherwise be
>> your best allies.  Even if it seems simpler, it doesn't actually
>> work in the end.
>
>
> President Bush gave the order to invade Iraq illegally. I do hold him
> personally responsible for that. And he for his part would accept 
> responsibility. In Australia, the Howard government supported him
> when he should have opposed him or counselled against him, so I do
> hold the Howard government and John Howard personally responsible
> for that. In the UK, I hold Blair personally responsible. 
> These men had jobs to do and public trusts to uphold and so it is proper
> that they be held personally responsible for the good they do and the 
> harm.
> But Bush could only do what he did, and Howard and Blair what they
> did, because they were acting as agents within a larger framework.
> And the citizens of their countries are the human manifestations of those
> larger frameworks.
>
> If we who post to the extropian list want to understand why progress
> is inhibited and so do our bit to increase it we have to be honest.
>
> Bush, Blair and Howard are all sufficiently skilled politicians and 
> readers
> of the public mood that they would love to have opposition to them 
> characterisable as anti-americanism or anti-western or un-australia,
> because they can then turn the mob on those that oppose what them.
> But that does not mean that there are not rational humanistic grounds
> for being anti-American, and anti-Western, and anti-Australian when
> the collective citizenry of America, or the UK or Australia are morally
> culpable for not caring enough to hold their governments to account for
> breaches of promise and further contributions to the erosion of human
> rights and the rule of law. 
>
> Brett Paatsch
>
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat
>
>