|
Dissolve into Evergreens
|
||||
|
It - In a nutshell The Onion | Point-Counterpoint... Lilly Now that spring is here, I can open up ... Closest thing you'll get I like my privacy, b... Rainbow Power While driving around today I go... D'oh! Chaotic Not Random The ICW is back at CNR.... Busted! Cheney wanted to raise your taxes in 1986... Hands on the washing machine please! blunted on r... Eternal Sunshine? (spoilers) I've been wanting t... Visit Steve G Steve Gilliard's News Blog: "I th... Manna from heaven CENTCOM Leaflet Gallery Am I t... Justin Oldham - Politics and Patriotism
Wilco The Flaming Lips The New Radicals John Mayer Zero 7 Dream Theater Radiohead Death Cab for Cutie The Notwist O.S.I. Ani Difranco The Shins Elliott Smith Badly Drawn Boy Chroma Key Coheed and Cambria The Streets Andrew Bird Sufjan Stevens Atom Site Feed 
|
4.07.2004
Elite opinion is turning In Iraq, Without Options (washingtonpost.com): "We wrested control of Iraq when we did not have to, and leaving it to its own devices as sectarian violence grows worse would be a dismal end. The only unequivocally good policy option before the American people is to dump the president who got us into this mess, who had no trouble sending our young people to Iraq but who cannot steel himself to face the Sept. 11 commission alone." I can admit when I'm wrong, and I did so, last night while discussing Iraq with my dad. I admitted that I was wrong to think that it would take longer to overthrow Iraq than it did. I was surprised by the speed at which their military collapsed and we were able to roll into Baghdad. But other than that I've been spot on. Its amusing to watch the shifting rationales on the right. They are victims to a delusion. So too are some on the left, especially those most in tune with Democratic partisanship. I'll tell you a little secret to understanding events: Start from scratch, make no assumptions about who the good guys are, make no assumptions about what people's motivation are. Start with basic evidence and work from there. Its a long slog (to borrow a phrase) but in the end you come out with a much better hypothesis. Yes, this is a scientific process. A common mistake is to confuse the personal with the institutional. What people want as individuals can be quickly subsumed once they become part of an institution. Take my store manager for an example, he's a nice guy, loves his family and genuinely cares about people, but when he's acting as part of the institution none of that can affect his decisions. The world is full of great people who for reasons outside of their own convictions do things that lead to horrible consequences. America is an institution much like a corporation. Collectively we have certain expectations which leads to actions that individually we might find appalling. My best example of this is the use of child labor in other countries. Individually we might find the idea of using kids to built Televisions, CD Players, Tennis Shoes or Game Boys distasteful but at the same time we demand lower prices for our goods. Our own individual opinions matter very little if the institution as a whole is more powerful. There is a difference between public opinion and public demand. While we may publicly opine about our desire to "free the Iraqi people" we also have a much greater public demand for other goals. It may seem odd to think that a president might go against public opinion but go WITH public demand. In such cases we find that public opinion can re-align with public demand. I feel this has happened a few times already in this whole Iraq situation. Let's a ask a few questions... -- and -- -- or -- | |
About Me
Any Box 
|
||
|
Dissolve into Evergreens
|
||||
