Brad Stroud wrote:
> It always seems easier to start somewhere else then in one's own backyard
> yes? That might actually require admitting we are not the staunch and
> relentless defenders of human rights we like to make ourselves out to be.
I guess you're addressing the American and NATO governments here. No one
on this list that I've seen is naive enough to have learned anything from your
statement. :-)
We know our governments are hypocritical. We've read Foucault, so we know to be
suspicious. I would venture that most of us have read Chomsky and Said too, so
let's get past "Intro to Leftism 101" here. You're preaching to the choir,
brother... :-)
> True we must start somewhere. But when the war is over and a military
> presence is in Kosovo for the next decade or so to enforce human rights will
> we then turn toward our own marginalized, disenfranchised and abused (For
> Canada a start would be the Aboriginal Peoples, for America a start would be
> both African-Americans and Native-Americans I presume) and do the same?
Well, when that time comes like-minded people should demand
that our governments follow through, be consistent, and address
local human rights concerns. I totally agree.
No one is disagreeing that this would be a good thing. But regardless
of whether or not other situations are addressed later, it bears
no logical relationship that I can see as to whether something
should be done now.
For example, regardless whether police follow and investigate rape
crimes in the future, they should do so now, irrespective of what they
"might" do in the future. No different in Kosovo.
---
Christopher W. Chase
-----------------------------------------------
ECA 377 Department of Religious Studies
Arizona State University Tempe, AZ
(480) 965-7145
christopher.chase@xxxxxxx
http://www.public.asu.edu/~heresy
-----------------------------------------------
> It always seems easier to start somewhere else then in one's own backyard
> yes? That might actually require admitting we are not the staunch and
> relentless defenders of human rights we like to make ourselves out to be.
I guess you're addressing the American and NATO governments here. No one
on this list that I've seen is naive enough to have learned anything from your
statement. :-)
We know our governments are hypocritical. We've read Foucault, so we know to be
suspicious. I would venture that most of us have read Chomsky and Said too, so
let's get past "Intro to Leftism 101" here. You're preaching to the choir,
brother... :-)
> True we must start somewhere. But when the war is over and a military
> presence is in Kosovo for the next decade or so to enforce human rights will
> we then turn toward our own marginalized, disenfranchised and abused (For
> Canada a start would be the Aboriginal Peoples, for America a start would be
> both African-Americans and Native-Americans I presume) and do the same?
Well, when that time comes like-minded people should demand
that our governments follow through, be consistent, and address
local human rights concerns. I totally agree.
No one is disagreeing that this would be a good thing. But regardless
of whether or not other situations are addressed later, it bears
no logical relationship that I can see as to whether something
should be done now.
For example, regardless whether police follow and investigate rape
crimes in the future, they should do so now, irrespective of what they
"might" do in the future. No different in Kosovo.
---
Christopher W. Chase
-----------------------------------------------
ECA 377 Department of Religious Studies
Arizona State University Tempe, AZ
(480) 965-7145
christopher.chase@xxxxxxx
http://www.public.asu.edu/~heresy
-----------------------------------------------