Quote:
Originally posted by The Strangler
1) Using large words doesn't make you sound intelligent when what you are saying lacks any facts to back it up.
2) The writer never said that America never made any mistakes. Of course we do, but when America makes mistakes it is because they are actually trying to make the world a better place to live. Its very easy to criticize a country for making mistakes, when other countries don't make any simply because they don't do anything.
3) America has done far more good than bad in history, despite what negative self-hating pseudo-intellectuals like to say. Has America also acted in its own best interests? Of course, why should we be held so far above any other country in the world. The fact of the matter is that most of the time what is in our best interest is in the best interest of world democracy and freedom.
4) I notice you have quoted the most negative part of the article to defend your statements. How even handed. You would almost think that nothing of value was said in the article by reading your post. 
We cannot "save" everyone, but we can do the best that we can with what we have, and we do.
|
I'm amazed you could somehow extract unpatriotism from my post. The original intention of my post was to point out that America is a country far too great to be praised by such a blatanly sycophantic and useless literature. I_never_mentioned that America is somehow inherently evil due to the mistakes it makes or due to the selfishness with which it operates in international affairs.
My original point, is that doing ethically sound actions in the face of a tragedy is something to be praised for but not worshipped; and that in dealing with the tragedy, any infliction of injustices in reparation of the tragedy is equally unjust. As I have pointed out in my previous post, the sort of "you did so much to us that doing some unjust things to you back isn't much of a problem" attitude does not exist to serve justice. On the contrary, it is a disservice to it.
Do you get that? It doesn't matter how many people lost their lives. In doesn't matter what kind of cruelty was inflicted. If you use injustice as a means to carry out justice, a contradiction and a wrongdoing occurs.
But in any case, let's tackle your "points" one by one.
1) I'm sorry you feel that vocabulary of this magnitude seems "large" to you in a sense that I am trying to be merely pretentious or pedantic. As for not backing up my point with facts; my point is not about facts or statistic or hard data. It's about a fundametal idea with which this very nation was founded on. Can you think of a "fact" or data to negate the idea that employing injustice in the face of a tragedy is an ethically wrong idea of creating justice?
2) I never said America should be scolded for every mistake we make. Neither did I ever say that we are just an evil empire of self-interests. Quite the opposite. I think we are in a just frame of mind. But when we become callused to making mistakes that create injustice, we need to evaulate ourselves and criticize ourselves for that.
This is a basic idea. It's okay to make mistakes. But it isn't okay to repeat the same mistakes again and again. When we become callused like "so what if they suffer, we suffered more," we become callused to injustice. And that, in my opinion, should never be condoned.
As for the intention of America acting out of world interest as opposed to its own, I have no idea how you are supporting this. I mean, look at what you are saying: we act out of other people's interests, not ours. This is a fundamentally debatable proposition as it ties with the idea (in your case, an assumption) of human nature. How do you ever know what human nature is really like? In other words, how do you know what motivates America is out of world interest and not of the self? How can you
prove a motive? Motive is a mental state. How can you prove it? And if you can't prove it, why are you making the assumption?
I also see that you make a broad generalization about other countries doing nothing, while America is carrying the torch valiantly. Can't you see that you're merely buying into an ultranationalistic assumption? You told me that I have no facts to back up my claim in your first point. So what backing do you have for this sort of a broad generalization?
3) I would probably agree wholeheartedly with you in this regard. I think the good we have achieved far outweighs the bad.
What I'm saying is, we shouldn't become lenient on ourselves because of that. Why not? Well, you want the country to keep doing those good things, don't you? If you can't criticize your own mistakes, how can you ever know what's right and what's wrong?
I can argue for your case that what is good for America most of the time is good for the democracy of the world in general. But what relevance does this have? I never said the opposite was the case. Neither did I mention that we shouldn't act out of self-interest. I think you need to reread or something.
4) If you have a piece of pie that's rotten on one side but only that side, I would be hesistant to think you would eat it. A piece of literature, tainted by a total misconception, is not unlike the bad pie. Sure, you could cut off the rotten part and eat it. But that wouldn't change the uneasiness of digesting something that contained such malice.
Your last statement is puzzling. Of course we can't always do the best. But what's wrong with
trying to do the best?