If the evil fucks who run this country(USA) want
to exterminate Milosevic for reasons of their own,
reasons I know don't have anything to do with concern
for "human rights", Then I say more power to them and
let's help to the limited extent that we're each able
given our own status and positioning in the world. I'm
now actively warmongering to the best of my ability
and would advise anyone with a shred of decency to do
the same.
This is one of those rare occassions when what the
evil fucks need to do to further their own agenda
happens to agree with what a decent human being would
do given the same assets to work with. Let's not try
to make the situation any more complicated than it is,
Ok? If Foucault were alive today, he would be
screaming at the top of his lungs against Milosevic,
against fascism and genocide. Foucault was never
concerned with keeping his own ethical hymen intacted.
He was concerned with getting things done. Getting
things done in this instance means becoming a
conscious tool of American hegemony. Hold your nose
and do it people. Foucault would.
Let me do something that would be actually usefull
if I had enough of a name to do it on the national
media. Let me say that Serbian actions over the last
several years have convinced me that the majority of
Serbians are Evil and that as long as there is a
Serbia the Balkans will be as much of a hell as
Serbian power can create. The moral thing to do is to
bomb Serbia into rubble and then bounce the rubble. I
don't know how to say "Serbia is not" in latin but
that's the general idea. Do to Serbia what Rome did to
Carthage. After the dust settled from the
bombing, ground troups could be sent in to make sure
nothing is left alive under a rock or anything. We
then either turn the former Serbia into a gigantic
rubarb plantation administered by the UN or create
Greater Albania by declaring that what's left of
Serbia happens to just cover the repartations owed to
all those displaced Albanians.
Think of this modest proposal being made and
becoming the loudly stated policy preference of say
%30 of the American people. If you don't think the
number could be that high, it just proves you've never
been to Texas and still don't understand how the late
great Johm Wayne remained a great star for 40 years
without being able to act his way out of a paper bag.
Slick Willy then becomes the voice of moderation
by saying "We will not respond to genocide with
genocide. That would be wrong. After victory is
achieved, Milosevic and his henchman will be tried.
The Serbian people will be given the same chance to
rejoin the human race that our German allies were
given after the fall of Hitler. The process of
denazifaction may be long and difficult given how far
fallen the Serbs are, But NATO, like the Good Lord,
cherishs the prodigal. We shall do this great work,
the work of the peace, together." We Americans can't
get enough of that kind of shit and this fact may be
the best thing going for anyone in the Balkans who is
not Serbian and maybe even for those few Serbians who
find Milosevic disgusting.
--- "J. Ransom" <dickins@xxxxxx> wrote:
> I too enjoyed reading the arguments of Said,
> Bourdieu, et al, but I wasn't convinced. You can see
> an article along similar lines as theirs in the
> Village Voice. The problem with these arguments, for
> me, is that they are based in large part on a
> criticism of hypocrisy. In the form of, "How can the
> U.S. justify opposing humanitarian disasters in
> Kosovo when it trucks with other regimes, such as
> Turkey, who do much the same thing we criticize
> Milosovic for?" But instead of convincing our
> leaders that they are violating the rule of
> noncontradiction by supporting human rights in one
> place while not doing so in another, I think we
> should encourage them when they do act and criticize
> them when they don't.
>
> Notice that the piece by French intellectuals was
> filled with simply contrary claims -- "the bombing
> won't help the refugee crisis; it will hurt"; "the
> bombing won't help limit the spread of hostilities;
> it will promote the spread of hostilities." Well,
> these are pragmatic probabilistic judgments, and the
> authors give no reason to think their read is more
> accurate than the Pentagon's.
>
> I'm by no means convinced that the bombings have had
> no adverse affects on Milosevic and his military
> machine. I do believe Milosevic was a big player in
> the disaster in Bosnia, and I think he and his
> military are carrying out ethnic cleansing in
> Kosovo, which includes mass killings.
>
> -- John
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Ian Robert Douglas
> <Ian_Robert_Douglas@xxxxxxxxx>
> To: foucault@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> <foucault@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Date: Thursday, April 08, 1999 12:43 PM
> Subject: Re: Bronte/Said/Foucault???
>
>
> I've no doubt, if alive, Foucault would be
> talking about Kosovo; can't we
> talk about Kosovo without talking about him?
> With many other listserv
> groups I'm in favour of a division of labour,
> but with Foucault--just
> simply because of the man--I find it difficult
> to separate the relevant
> from the not so relevant (I know Clare you
> weren't saying Kosovo is beyond
> our remit). Sometimes it doesn't even stop at
> my shopping list, but then
> that only goes to show that indeed, we can think
> Foucault without having to
> name him. "Philosophy's sole aim is to become
> worthy of the event", writes
> Deleuze. Does anyone have any thoughts,
> powerful ones, on what on earth is
> happening in this emerging catastrophe?
>
> best wishes/sincerely,
> ______________________________________________
> Ian R. Douglas | Watson Institute for
> International Studies
> Brown University, Box 1831, Providence, RI
> 02912 USA
>
> tel: 401 863-2420 fax: 401 863-2192
>
> "There are more ideas on earth than
> intellectuals think.
> And these ideas are more active, stronger,
> more
> resistant, more passionate than 'politicians'
> think.
> We have to be there at the birth of ideas,
> the bursting
> outward of their force: not in books
> expressing them,
> but in events manifesting this force .. "
> - Foucault
>
> http://www.powerfoundation.org
>
>
<HR>
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD W3 HTML//EN">
<HTML>
<HEAD>
<META content=text/html;charset=iso-8859-1
http-equiv=Content-Type>
<META content='"MSHTML 4.72.2106.6"' name=GENERATOR>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT color=#000000 face="Courier New" size=2>I
too enjoyed reading the
arguments of Said, Bourdieu, et al, but I wasn't
convinced. You can see an
article along similar lines as theirs in the Village
Voice. The problem with
these arguments, for me, is that they are based in
large part on a criticism of
hypocrisy. In the form of, "How can the U.S.
justify opposing humanitarian
disasters in Kosovo when it trucks with other regimes,
such as Turkey, who do
much the same thing we criticize Milosovic for?"
But instead of convincing
our leaders that they are violating the rule of
noncontradiction by supporting
human rights in one place while not doing so in
another, I think we should
encourage them when they do act and criticize them
when they don't.
</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#000000 face="Courier New"
size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face="Courier New" size=2>Notice that the
piece by French
intellectuals was filled with simply contrary claims
-- "the bombing won't
help the refugee crisis; it will hurt"; "the
bombing won't help limit
the spread of hostilities; it will promote the spread
of hostilities."
Well, these are pragmatic probabilistic judgments, and
the authors give no
reason to think their read is more accurate than the
Pentagon's.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face="Courier New"
size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face="Courier New" size=2>I'm by no means
convinced that the bombings
have had no adverse affects on Milosevic and his
military machine. I do believe
Milosevic was a big player in the disaster in Bosnia,
and I think he and his
military are carrying out ethnic cleansing in Kosovo,
which includes mass
killings. </FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face="Courier New"
size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face="Courier New" size=2>--
John</FONT></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE
style="BORDER-LEFT: #000000 solid 2px; MARGIN-LEFT:
5px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px">
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2><B>-----Original
Message-----</B><BR><B>From:
</B>Ian Robert Douglas <<A
href="mailto:Ian_Robert_Douglas@xxxxxxxxx";>Ian_Robert_Douglas@xxxxxxxxx</A>><BR><B>To:
</B><A
href="mailto:foucault@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx";>foucault@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx</A>
<<A
href="mailto:foucault@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx";>foucault@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx</A>><BR><B>Date:
</B>Thursday, April 08, 1999 12:43
PM<BR><B>Subject: </B>Re:
Bronte/Said/Foucault???<BR><BR></DIV></FONT>I've
no doubt, if alive,
Foucault would be talking about Kosovo; can't
we<BR>talk about Kosovo
without talking about him? With many other
listserv<BR>groups I'm in
favour of a division of labour, but with
Foucault--just<BR>simply because of
the man--I find it difficult to separate the
relevant<BR>from the not so
relevant (I know Clare you weren't saying Kosovo
is beyond<BR>our
remit). Sometimes it doesn't even stop at my
shopping list, but
then<BR>that only goes to show that indeed, we can
think Foucault without
having to<BR>name him. "Philosophy's
sole aim is to become worthy
of the event", writes<BR>Deleuze. Does
anyone have any thoughts,
powerful ones, on what on earth is<BR>happening in
this emerging
catastrophe?<BR><BR>best
wishes/sincerely,<BR>______________________________________________<BR>Ian
R. Douglas | Watson Institute for
International Studies<BR>Brown
University, Box 1831, Providence, RI
02912 USA<BR><BR>tel: 401
863-2420 fax: 401
863-2192<BR><BR>"There are
more ideas on earth than intellectuals
think.<BR> And these
ideas are more active, stronger,
more<BR> resistant, more
passionate than 'politicians'
think.<BR> We have to be there at
the birth of ideas, the bursting<BR>
outward of their force: not
in books expressing them,<BR> but in
events manifesting this
force .. " -
Foucault<BR><BR><A
href="http://www.powerfoundation.org";>http://www.powerfoundation.org</A><BR></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>
===
"Work like you don't need the money, love like you've never been hurt and dance like no one is watching." Richard M. Nixon
"We are all Jews and we are all Germans." Michel Foucault
"The sympathy of the walnut for the human head that makes walnuts a cure for headaches and head wounds would be unknown except that the walnut looks like a brain." Michel Foucault
_________________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com
to exterminate Milosevic for reasons of their own,
reasons I know don't have anything to do with concern
for "human rights", Then I say more power to them and
let's help to the limited extent that we're each able
given our own status and positioning in the world. I'm
now actively warmongering to the best of my ability
and would advise anyone with a shred of decency to do
the same.
This is one of those rare occassions when what the
evil fucks need to do to further their own agenda
happens to agree with what a decent human being would
do given the same assets to work with. Let's not try
to make the situation any more complicated than it is,
Ok? If Foucault were alive today, he would be
screaming at the top of his lungs against Milosevic,
against fascism and genocide. Foucault was never
concerned with keeping his own ethical hymen intacted.
He was concerned with getting things done. Getting
things done in this instance means becoming a
conscious tool of American hegemony. Hold your nose
and do it people. Foucault would.
Let me do something that would be actually usefull
if I had enough of a name to do it on the national
media. Let me say that Serbian actions over the last
several years have convinced me that the majority of
Serbians are Evil and that as long as there is a
Serbia the Balkans will be as much of a hell as
Serbian power can create. The moral thing to do is to
bomb Serbia into rubble and then bounce the rubble. I
don't know how to say "Serbia is not" in latin but
that's the general idea. Do to Serbia what Rome did to
Carthage. After the dust settled from the
bombing, ground troups could be sent in to make sure
nothing is left alive under a rock or anything. We
then either turn the former Serbia into a gigantic
rubarb plantation administered by the UN or create
Greater Albania by declaring that what's left of
Serbia happens to just cover the repartations owed to
all those displaced Albanians.
Think of this modest proposal being made and
becoming the loudly stated policy preference of say
%30 of the American people. If you don't think the
number could be that high, it just proves you've never
been to Texas and still don't understand how the late
great Johm Wayne remained a great star for 40 years
without being able to act his way out of a paper bag.
Slick Willy then becomes the voice of moderation
by saying "We will not respond to genocide with
genocide. That would be wrong. After victory is
achieved, Milosevic and his henchman will be tried.
The Serbian people will be given the same chance to
rejoin the human race that our German allies were
given after the fall of Hitler. The process of
denazifaction may be long and difficult given how far
fallen the Serbs are, But NATO, like the Good Lord,
cherishs the prodigal. We shall do this great work,
the work of the peace, together." We Americans can't
get enough of that kind of shit and this fact may be
the best thing going for anyone in the Balkans who is
not Serbian and maybe even for those few Serbians who
find Milosevic disgusting.
--- "J. Ransom" <dickins@xxxxxx> wrote:
> I too enjoyed reading the arguments of Said,
> Bourdieu, et al, but I wasn't convinced. You can see
> an article along similar lines as theirs in the
> Village Voice. The problem with these arguments, for
> me, is that they are based in large part on a
> criticism of hypocrisy. In the form of, "How can the
> U.S. justify opposing humanitarian disasters in
> Kosovo when it trucks with other regimes, such as
> Turkey, who do much the same thing we criticize
> Milosovic for?" But instead of convincing our
> leaders that they are violating the rule of
> noncontradiction by supporting human rights in one
> place while not doing so in another, I think we
> should encourage them when they do act and criticize
> them when they don't.
>
> Notice that the piece by French intellectuals was
> filled with simply contrary claims -- "the bombing
> won't help the refugee crisis; it will hurt"; "the
> bombing won't help limit the spread of hostilities;
> it will promote the spread of hostilities." Well,
> these are pragmatic probabilistic judgments, and the
> authors give no reason to think their read is more
> accurate than the Pentagon's.
>
> I'm by no means convinced that the bombings have had
> no adverse affects on Milosevic and his military
> machine. I do believe Milosevic was a big player in
> the disaster in Bosnia, and I think he and his
> military are carrying out ethnic cleansing in
> Kosovo, which includes mass killings.
>
> -- John
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Ian Robert Douglas
> <Ian_Robert_Douglas@xxxxxxxxx>
> To: foucault@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> <foucault@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Date: Thursday, April 08, 1999 12:43 PM
> Subject: Re: Bronte/Said/Foucault???
>
>
> I've no doubt, if alive, Foucault would be
> talking about Kosovo; can't we
> talk about Kosovo without talking about him?
> With many other listserv
> groups I'm in favour of a division of labour,
> but with Foucault--just
> simply because of the man--I find it difficult
> to separate the relevant
> from the not so relevant (I know Clare you
> weren't saying Kosovo is beyond
> our remit). Sometimes it doesn't even stop at
> my shopping list, but then
> that only goes to show that indeed, we can think
> Foucault without having to
> name him. "Philosophy's sole aim is to become
> worthy of the event", writes
> Deleuze. Does anyone have any thoughts,
> powerful ones, on what on earth is
> happening in this emerging catastrophe?
>
> best wishes/sincerely,
> ______________________________________________
> Ian R. Douglas | Watson Institute for
> International Studies
> Brown University, Box 1831, Providence, RI
> 02912 USA
>
> tel: 401 863-2420 fax: 401 863-2192
>
> "There are more ideas on earth than
> intellectuals think.
> And these ideas are more active, stronger,
> more
> resistant, more passionate than 'politicians'
> think.
> We have to be there at the birth of ideas,
> the bursting
> outward of their force: not in books
> expressing them,
> but in events manifesting this force .. "
> - Foucault
>
> http://www.powerfoundation.org
>
>
<HR>
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD W3 HTML//EN">
<HTML>
<HEAD>
<META content=text/html;charset=iso-8859-1
http-equiv=Content-Type>
<META content='"MSHTML 4.72.2106.6"' name=GENERATOR>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT color=#000000 face="Courier New" size=2>I
too enjoyed reading the
arguments of Said, Bourdieu, et al, but I wasn't
convinced. You can see an
article along similar lines as theirs in the Village
Voice. The problem with
these arguments, for me, is that they are based in
large part on a criticism of
hypocrisy. In the form of, "How can the U.S.
justify opposing humanitarian
disasters in Kosovo when it trucks with other regimes,
such as Turkey, who do
much the same thing we criticize Milosovic for?"
But instead of convincing
our leaders that they are violating the rule of
noncontradiction by supporting
human rights in one place while not doing so in
another, I think we should
encourage them when they do act and criticize them
when they don't.
</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#000000 face="Courier New"
size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face="Courier New" size=2>Notice that the
piece by French
intellectuals was filled with simply contrary claims
-- "the bombing won't
help the refugee crisis; it will hurt"; "the
bombing won't help limit
the spread of hostilities; it will promote the spread
of hostilities."
Well, these are pragmatic probabilistic judgments, and
the authors give no
reason to think their read is more accurate than the
Pentagon's.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face="Courier New"
size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face="Courier New" size=2>I'm by no means
convinced that the bombings
have had no adverse affects on Milosevic and his
military machine. I do believe
Milosevic was a big player in the disaster in Bosnia,
and I think he and his
military are carrying out ethnic cleansing in Kosovo,
which includes mass
killings. </FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face="Courier New"
size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face="Courier New" size=2>--
John</FONT></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE
style="BORDER-LEFT: #000000 solid 2px; MARGIN-LEFT:
5px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px">
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2><B>-----Original
Message-----</B><BR><B>From:
</B>Ian Robert Douglas <<A
href="mailto:Ian_Robert_Douglas@xxxxxxxxx";>Ian_Robert_Douglas@xxxxxxxxx</A>><BR><B>To:
</B><A
href="mailto:foucault@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx";>foucault@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx</A>
<<A
href="mailto:foucault@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx";>foucault@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx</A>><BR><B>Date:
</B>Thursday, April 08, 1999 12:43
PM<BR><B>Subject: </B>Re:
Bronte/Said/Foucault???<BR><BR></DIV></FONT>I've
no doubt, if alive,
Foucault would be talking about Kosovo; can't
we<BR>talk about Kosovo
without talking about him? With many other
listserv<BR>groups I'm in
favour of a division of labour, but with
Foucault--just<BR>simply because of
the man--I find it difficult to separate the
relevant<BR>from the not so
relevant (I know Clare you weren't saying Kosovo
is beyond<BR>our
remit). Sometimes it doesn't even stop at my
shopping list, but
then<BR>that only goes to show that indeed, we can
think Foucault without
having to<BR>name him. "Philosophy's
sole aim is to become worthy
of the event", writes<BR>Deleuze. Does
anyone have any thoughts,
powerful ones, on what on earth is<BR>happening in
this emerging
catastrophe?<BR><BR>best
wishes/sincerely,<BR>______________________________________________<BR>Ian
R. Douglas | Watson Institute for
International Studies<BR>Brown
University, Box 1831, Providence, RI
02912 USA<BR><BR>tel: 401
863-2420 fax: 401
863-2192<BR><BR>"There are
more ideas on earth than intellectuals
think.<BR> And these
ideas are more active, stronger,
more<BR> resistant, more
passionate than 'politicians'
think.<BR> We have to be there at
the birth of ideas, the bursting<BR>
outward of their force: not
in books expressing them,<BR> but in
events manifesting this
force .. " -
Foucault<BR><BR><A
href="http://www.powerfoundation.org";>http://www.powerfoundation.org</A><BR></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>
===
"Work like you don't need the money, love like you've never been hurt and dance like no one is watching." Richard M. Nixon
"We are all Jews and we are all Germans." Michel Foucault
"The sympathy of the walnut for the human head that makes walnuts a cure for headaches and head wounds would be unknown except that the walnut looks like a brain." Michel Foucault
_________________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com