Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

internetworkers - Re: [internetworkers] fury over WTC ads

internetworkers AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Internetworkers: http://www.ibiblio.org/internetworkers/

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: David R.Matusiak <dave AT matusiak.org>
  • To: "Internetworkers: http://www.ibiblio.org/internetworkers/" <internetworkers AT lists.ibiblio.org>
  • Subject: Re: [internetworkers] fury over WTC ads
  • Date: Fri, 5 Mar 2004 15:56:14 -0500

Rebecca --

On Mar 5, 2004, at 3:16 PM, Rebecca O'Connell wrote:

On 3/5/04 2:43 PM, "David R.Matusiak" <dave AT matusiak.org> wrote:

On Mar 5, 2004, at 2:29 PM, Tony Spencer wrote:

ok, i get what you are saying. don't agree.

the only thing i can extrapolate from this is that you are the type of
person who wants things to remain exactly as they are. i.e. "things
are fine right now, it ain't broke, so don't go a fixin' it."

It isn't about keeping things exactly the way they are, it's about not
repeating history unless you *want* to repeat it. World War II was the last
war of that large a scale that we were involved in and saying it is useless
to look at how we handled it is like saying that you can't learn anything
from experience.

Well, we were talking about the appropriateness of using others' tragedy as your cornerstone for political campaigning, so I can't see how WWII got involved. This was not a discussion of war, strategies, and tactics associated with war. It may be now, but initially it was about applying 50 year old thinking to current day problems.

If that were true, we'd be babies our entire lives. It
doesn't mean we have to endorse everything that was done, but we do have to
recognize that it happened, especially since the events of WWII had such a
direct effect on the current world order.

I'm not trying to say that this stuff never happened. I just don't think we can necessarily make our decision based upon what they did two generations ago. what was considered acceptable then is no longer considered appropriate (in certain circumstances).

i'm not referencing an example such as helms voting against civil
rights. its perfectly logical to compare the two campaigns.

so, if a candidate had their competition "eliminated" sometime in the
past 100 years, it would be "okay" for one to do it present day?

No, but the background information helps us to understand *why* people are
whacking their competition. You could look at that information and ask
"Well, what made this person think he could get away with this? Could he
still (presuming he did)? If he could, shouldn't we maybe do something about
that before someone does whack another candidate?"

what good is knowing "Why?" if no one is ever going to do anything about it? there are lots of statistics and encyclopedias in the world but i'm much less interested in cataloguing the tragedies of the past 2,000 years than i am in improving the global situation in the next 50-200 years.





Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page