"Men in authority will always think that criticism of their policies is dangerous. They will always equate their policies with patriotism, and find criticism subversive." - Henry Steele Commager "Dissent is the highest form of patriotism" - Thomas Jefferson "Beware of the leader who bangs the drums of war in order to whip the citizenry into patriotic fervor, for patriotism is indeed a double-edged sword. It both emboldens the blood, just as it narrows the mind. And when the drums of war have reached a fever pitch and the blood boils with hate and the mind has closed, the leader will have no need in seizing the rights of the citizenry, [who] infused with fear and blinded by patriotism, will offer up all of their rights unto the leader and gladly so. How will I know? For this I have done. And I am Julius Caesar." "The time is fast approaching when to call a man a patriot will be the deepest insult you can offer him. Patriotism now means advocating plunder in the interest of the privileged classes of the particular State system into which we have happened to be born." - Leo Tolstoy "No matter that patriotism is too often the refuge of scoundrels. Dissent, rebellion, and all-around hell-raising remain the true duty of patriots." - Barbara Ehrenreich My Personal Favorite... "You're not supposed to be so blind with patriotism that you can't face reality. Wrong is wrong, no matter who says it." - Malcom X
You may not agree with the all of the President's positions but what you are asking for is a blind loyalty. Yes this is America's war but the President isn't America and as Americans it is our right to weigh in on the direction of our country. Certainly the consequences of this war will have grave repercussions which is why its even more important for us to weigh in. No one not even the president has been able to define exactly what victory means. Technically under the original authorization victory has already been achieved since Saddam is no longer in power. Where our goals are nebulous and the costs remain high its absolutely important for us to question the direction that things are going. Very possibly a true liberal would agree with that which is why I think there are some huge problems with Liberalism, especially the Wilsonian Liberalism the curretn Admin. espouses. All that we've been seeing is looking at ends without considering means and benefits without costs. The things you spell out are big benefits but they way that the Admin. has chosen to try to get them is fraught with high costs. The Admin and leadership has consistently failed to address those costs.
A person who loves the troops but doesn't support the war might post articles that show why the war was a bad idea, or how it hurts the troops. They might post that as evidence to back up their position. It doesn't mean that they want the U.S. to lose. Why do you act like Naked pyramiding is all that happened? We know that murder, rape, and worse happened. By ignoring the worst parts of what happened, and pretending that only some naked pyramiding happened, you are either ignorant of the facts though they have been presented here time and time again, or you are being dishonest.
Oh this is hilarious. He's talking about me and probably glynch. Amazing how he doesn't feel the need to "name names" all of a sudden. There's nothing new in this thread. I don't know why you guys bother with him.
seriously! This thread is really some weird form of masturbation for basso. It's kind of creepy in that "can't take my eyes off the car wreck" kind of way.
Great, great quotes. It makes you wonder how history tends to repeat itself. I always love that quote from Caesar. Similar discussion has been going on in China, and among oversea Chinese for quite a while, whether loving the country equals loving the government, whether loving the people equals loving the party, whether one can be a patriot and a dissent at the same time. I can understand the broad misunderstanding in those concepts in countries moving towards democracy, but was quite surprised to see it happening more and more frequently in established democratic countries like US.
Sam's excellent post caused me to do a bit of searching on my own. No one can say I haven't been consistant. For your reading pleasure... And my reply to the very much missed treeman... basso, you are really beginning to disturb me, bro. Your fixation with McCarthy's favorite phrase, combined with your use of it, is evidence of, in my opinion, an extreme view that panders to the very worst of human nature. At least the esteemed treeman used it in a quote. He didn't "say" it himself. Treeman had some class. I'm wondering where you put yours. Keep D&D Civil.
Frankly, mon homme, i'm beginning to wonder the same thing about you. perhaps if i included more smilies in my posts the intended irony would coe through more clearly. here, i'm not sure what this one means, but perhaps it will help you to lightedn up, focus less on semantics, and more on substance.
to be fair, this isn't really what to thread was intended to be about, naming names, to use a mccarthyist tactic, since that seems to be what many of you are obsessed by. was it a good movie? i'd hoped the thread would concentrate on the larger issue of what's "responsible" dissent in war time. perhaps "anything goes" is indeed appropriate for a basketball bbs. in congress, or from members of the establishment political opposition, i think not. here, such criticism may be "unpatriotic". in congress, it's irresponsible, which is much worse in my book. oh, and don't flatter yourself...
Substance is what I'm focusing on, my friend. We are human creatures, after all, and words are something we do. Clearly you are not unaware that you consistently keep calling people that disagree with the President unpatriotic. And when you use the phrase, "fellow travelers," it has a very decided meaning, and has had it since the days of Joe McCarthy. Frankly, it bothers me more that you keep calling patriotic liberals, and liberal Democrats, unpatriotic here, than the use of the phrase itself. I haven't seen the movie. The one time we tried to grab a screening, it was sold out. I've heard that it's excellent, however. One reason I posted what I did was to show my concern about McCarthy style political discourse even then, and I didn't direct anything negative towards treeman for using it in a quote. My problem was with who wrote it, and that should make plain enough my concern that you do. Maybe it's my age, or growing up with a JFK Democrat for a father, but that is not an innocuous phrase. Keep D&D Civil.
IOW, "I cannot prove anything, but will take this opportunity to deflect the challenge while continuing to claim that my utterly baseless charges are 100% accurate."
So, are you saying that liberals on this board don't really support terrorists, or Saddam, and you should have used a smiley face to show you that you didn't mean that? By the way if this thread isn't the place to name names, you might do so in the place provided for you. http://bbs.clutchfans.net/showthread.php?t=104553
you are ascribing a meaning to the phrase that i never intended, but i will try to be more sympathetic to your advanced age in the future! but on to substance- i have yet to see any address the meat of the issue. do you feel such dissent, whether justified, consistent, patriotic, etc, but political speech that demonstrates a lack of resolve on the part of members of government, damages troop morale and emboldens the enemy? and if you agree that it does, is that just the necessary price we pay for living in a democracy, or should dissent indeed stop at our nation's shores?
Who decides what's "Patriotic" who decides whats "responsible"? Are we talking about giving the position of our troops to the enemy, are we talking about revealing state secrets or are we talking about debating whether we think the country is going in the right direction? You've asked for a debate regarding dissent yet your primary argument is that people should stifle themselves.
semantics: The study of relationships between signs and symbols and what they represent. If we don't understand or if it is unclear what someone is 'saying,' how can we have 'substantive' debate? Likewise, if we are too general with our language, rather than specific in our points, how can we have 'substantive' debate? Just a thought...
Do you miss treeman as well, Hayes? I don't recall you using a loaded phrase like "fellow traveler," doing it over and over again, and then pretending not to understand what the "big deal" is. Why? Because I think there are lines in a discussion that you will not cross. That's not to say you don't adamantly argue your position, to the extent that you coined a BBS phrase, to wit... "Don't go Hayes on me, dude!" Why does basso continue being so inflammatory? It's a mystery to me. (I know... I'll put the food tin down ) Keep D&D Civil.
it's a fair enough question- i suggest an independent panel made up of lurkers, denizens of the GARM, and Jazz fanboys... giving troop positions away would be treasonous and i doubt anyone would seriously defend anyone who'd done that. debate on the direction of the country is one thing. debate on the direction of the war is another, but still appropriate. rehashing old arguements as a political ploy to weaken the president, embolden the enemy, and damage the moral of our troops, fits the president's definition of deeply irresponsible. and yes, i think in some instances stifling ones self is the right thing to do. we have a mechanism in this country to address our (dis)satisfaction with government. the people's elected representatives voted to authorize this war (IMHO they abdicated their responsibility- there should have been a formal declaration of war), and the people chose to re-elect those who authorized and continued to support the war.
Treeman always made a substantive argument somewhere in there. I never do understand some people's problem with that. Just insulting or labeling someone is not an argument. But an insult without an argument is indicative of the weakness of your point. Repeating the same tired mantra over and over again is a waste of time. I could name some people from the other end of the spectrum who do this as well, but I won't (Glynch).
