posted on July 18, 2005 09:35:18 AM
I will keep answering the ones that are directed to me with insults and name calling and probably the ones where you insult others such as the "brain dead" one to desquirrel and the "leave his kids alone on the worst corner in town" to another.
posted on July 18, 2005 10:27:29 AM
Just so happens in today's paper is a syndicated column originally sourced from the LA Times that describes this discussion perfectly:
BY MAX BOOT
The London bombings have occassioned many comparisons with the 1940 Blitz. This is usually cited as evidence of British fortitude — the attitude exemplified by cockneys in the heavily bombed East End who told Winston Churchill, "We can take it, but give it 'em back" That is indeed the dominant
British (and American) attitude, then and now, but it is important not to ignore a streak of timidity there (and here) that may get stronger in the years ahead and that was present even when civilization faced an existential threat from Nazism.
Appeasement did not end with the German invasion of Poland in 1939. Even afterward, many in Britain (and even more in the United States)opposed active resistance. Conservative worthies such as Lorc Halifax sought a negotiated settlement. Fascists such as Sir Oswald Mosley sought to bring Nazism to Britain. And communists and their fellow travelers opposed fighting Stalin's ally until Hitler invaded Russia. Even in January 1942, when German armies were at the gates of Moscow, George Orwell wrote in Partisan Review that "the greater part of the very young intelligentsia, are anti-war...don't believe in any `defense of democracy,' are inclined to prefer Germany to Britain, and
don't feel the horror of Fascism that we who are somewhat older feel". As if to illustrate Orwell's point, a pacifist poet named D.S. Savage wrote a reply in which he explained why he "would never fight and kill for such a phantasm" as "Britain's `democracy.'" Savage saw no difference between Britain and its
enemies because under the demands of war both were imposing totalitarianism: "Germans call it National Socialism. We call it democracy. The result is the same." Savage naively wondered, "Who is to say that a British victory will be less disastrous than a German one?" Savage thought the real problem was that Britain had lost "her meaning, her soul," but "the unloading of a billion tons
of bombs on Germany won't help this forward an inch." "Personally," he added, with hilarious understatement, "I do not care for Hitler." But he thought the way to resist Hitler was by not resisting him: "Whereas the rest of the nation is content with calling down obloquy on Hitler's head, we regard this as superficial. Hitler requires, not condemnation, but understanding." When
applied to the embodiment of pure evil; the usual liberal tropes about "understanding" not "condemnation" have an air of Monty Python about them. Yet there are uncomfortable echoes of Savage's sermonizing in the attitude of many.
"Imbecile" can be easy to define.
[ edited by desquirrel on Jul 18, 2005 10:28 AM ]
