Debug: Database connection successful
You are not logged in.
Thank you Bill White for the link.
I think the biggest question for Europeans, Arabic countries etc.. is how *BUSH* describes freedom. He's using the word constantly, in often puzzling ways for non-Americans.
*Intuitively* I translate his use of the term freedom as 'do as I tell you to do, I've decided the only right way, and shall not rest untill the rest of the world thinks about this as I do,'
This feels fundamentallly threathening for *my* definition of freedom, however vague it might be. And I'm sure I'm not the only one.
it's a very laden word, should be used with a lot more caution, when adressing other societies.
'Freedom' is different for many people, countries, groups,... because of history. Belgians had for instance language wars, French had the bloody French Revolution, Americans the independance wars, etc etc... This history lingers... You define freedom differently, for a big part because of what happended to 'you' in the past.
Tread carefully
Offline
Like button can go here
Freedom is the non-negotiable demand of human dignity; the birthright of every person- in every civilization. Throughout history, freedom has been threatened by war and terror; it has been challenged by the clashing wills of powerful states and the evil designs of tyrants; and it has been tested by widespread poverty and disease. Today, humanity holds in its hands the opportunity to further freedom's triumph over all other all these foes. The United States welcomes our responsibility to lead in this great mission.
We are self-appointed, this determination made by the confluence of time and events that place our nation at a point in history where it might effect a lasting image.
We have an opportunity to impose our world view on all others, and given our relative power, one might assume we have a responsibility to spread what we deem to be an enlightened philosphy.
Fourth Reich, anyone?
so what are we talking about when we all talk about freedom?
In my opinion, we are talking about "choices". The freedom to make choices.
Where we all differ though, where we clash, is on what choices we all think people should have the freedom to choose.
Offline
Like button can go here
so what are we talking about when we all talk about freedom?
Something like a single hand clapping ?
We are the product that is seeking freedom from the ingredients.
In my opinion, we are talking about "choices". The freedom to make choices.
Confusion allows for numerous choices, then it turns out that the result is not wanted.
Midas touch in another form.
Offline
Like button can go here
Zen master confuses this one.
Freedom is choice, but it is choice which we try to limit in order to produce freedom.
If you are free to choose "A" or "B", but not "C", are you free?
Offline
Like button can go here
We are the product that is seeking freedom from the ingredients.
I like this way of phrasing it. Nicely said.
We Americans seek "freedom" from the constraints of society yet without society it is impossible to be human. The ancient Greeks (Aristotle) once said: A man without a city is either a God or a beast.
To the extent the American interpretation of freedom requires autonomy from society, are we then Gods or beasts?
Give someone a sufficient [b][i]why[/i][/b] and they can endure just about any [b][i]how[/i][/b]
Offline
Like button can go here
*I think the individual is obligated to society only insofar as society's values, mores, rules and etc. are fair to the individual. If society does show fairness to the individual (you, me, everyone else) then I think we are obligated to be productive, responsible, law-abiding etc.
We know that societies run to stagnation without a bit of friction, resistance and motion from within. Strong-willed individuals with ideas (visionaries), etc., tend to provide that stimulus.
Does human nature favor mediocrity? How many civilizations have their great heros? Hercules, Napoleon, Alexander the Great, etc. It seems the natural tendency is to look up to someone who stands out -- not to be happy with consensus and mediocrity.
As for conscientiousness, responsibility, having a good work ethic, being law abiding, etc., I am all those things and so I feel I'm meeting my obligations to society. But I wish to retain my individuality. So far as we know, life is very rare in the universe and so the concept of losing self and surrending to a hive mentality...just isn't me. There is a reason we have developed the words "me" and "you." But of course that doesn't mean it's okay to be anti-social, uncaring, etc.
It's give and take (both parties), like all relationships; a 2-way street.
And actually, I doubt we would have evolved much without a certain healthy individualistic drive. But like anything else, that drive can become pathological...as can the insistence on surrending or outright sacrificing the self to society, which is what totalitarianism demands.
--Cindy
We all know [i]those[/i] Venusians: Doing their hair in shock waves, smoking electrical coronas, wearing Van Allen belts and resting their tiny elbows on a Geiger counter...
--John Sladek (The New Apocrypha)
Offline
Like button can go here
Freedom is choice, but it is choice which we try to limit in order to produce freedom
Khrishnamurty would have analyzed something like this;
We are the past (genetic, cultural, etc.), choice is extension of the past.
Choice, based on the past, implies lack of seeing things as they are, presently.
When there is clarity of the perception, there is no choice.
Offline
Like button can go here
From the profound and thought-provoking, back to the political and shallow. (Sorry, MarsDog!)
Like I said, American policy in Iraq is "Mao-ist" - - follow the theory not the facts.
When the terrain doesn't correspond to the map, follow the map! Well, isn't that the very defining point of Leftism?
:;):
Offline
Like button can go here
From the profound and thought-provoking, back to the political and shallow. (Sorry, MarsDog!)
Like I said, American policy in Iraq is "Mao-ist" - - follow the theory not the facts.
When the terrain doesn't correspond to the map, follow the map! Well, isn't that the very defining point of Leftism?
:;):
Bush is so very Right, he is Left.
Give someone a sufficient [b][i]why[/i][/b] and they can endure just about any [b][i]how[/i][/b]
Offline
Like button can go here
An apt way to put it.
By the way, I know what freedom is:
"If liberty means anything at all, it means the right to tell people what they do not want to hear."
- George Orwell
:;):
Offline
Like button can go here