Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Carter's Nobel Prize and Camus Nobel prize isn't the same quest for peace in relation to Sartre and Heidegger

Expand Messages
  • Richard Radandt
    In all due respect Enrique, I do enjoy your comments. You and I do exchange change comments with each other in public. Carter might not be a Republican such as
    Message 1 of 1 , Dec 11, 2002
      In all due respect Enrique, I do enjoy your comments. You and I do exchange change comments with each other in public. Carter might not be a Republican such as Ford, Reagan, Nixon, Bush, or Eisenhower, but I fail to see he really does critique the capitalist system of the United States in a meaningful sense a Camus, a Sartre or a Heidegger does. The man isn't a Marxist in any sense of the word. His support of freedom movements in South America, Central America, Mexico, and Africa and in the country of India isn't real support. When you state he's a supporter of the United States, I ask which economic class does he support. To compare him to echoing similar ideas of Camus is just wrong. I would never consider his analysis and Camus' on the same level. That's I will still opt to consider Camus over Carter. Go back and read some of the four years of the Carter presidency and you will see how I can make this statement. It's possible you do understand the four years of the Carter presidency and yet there are no visible elements of his ability to eliminate the exploitation and suppression inherent in capitalism.

      My question is if Carter makes such a good speech to impress you how is it he doesn't make such relevant speeches since he left office. Carter may speak of enduring lives of despair and hopelessness and yet he does nothing to eliminate the system maintaining these economic relations. He speaks of the commitment to share with others our excessive wealth and does nothing to see excessive wealth doesn't continue. In fact, many people just want the opportunity to achieve excessive wealth for themselves in the countries the United States exploits. Their goal isn't the elimination of the class system and religion, theology, ethics, and the social pressure of the legal system. He's in effect saying to those who are hopeless and in despair to accept and introduce the capitalist system to their countries. In this way, their problems are over. This is only deception, betrayal, duplicity, deceit, and denial on the part of Carter. This isn't a free choice.

      War is one of the highest expressions of capitalism. War is now eroding some of the basic rights and freedoms the people who live in the United States enjoy. To criticize war and not capitalism in the same sentence is a betrayal of the freedom of all people. Carter isn't able to criticize capitalism. He still supports capitalism. Camus doesn't make this mistake. To look at events in terms of good and evil is simplistic and this is still one of owing an allegiance to the Catholic Church and not to the fight to make a free decision without the crutch of ethics and theology.

      Killing of each other's children occurs in the system of capitalism as one has a huge department of defense. Did Carter argue in his speech to eliminate 40% of the department of defense in the United States? I don't think he even wants 1% of elimination. Therefore, he says one thing and supports the other. The bond for humanity is greater than our fears and prejudices sounds very nice. This speech is a once a year event. All that remains after is sense of silence and absence. This is like my senior vice president who comes down from the twenty-fifth floor of the office building to wish all of us in the mailroom in the third sub basement a Merry Christmas once a year and we never see him again until the next year. If he would gives us a decent wage, some decent ventilation and cut his salary in half I might consider he to is a man of peace like Camus. Carter made his speech and I'm glad he did, but let us sees what he says and does one month from now. Now Carter is an old man, some of us did vote for him for president, and that's a mistake we will just need to live. It's also true Carter isn't using tanks, planes, bulldozers, and missiles to kill Arabs in Palestine as Ariel Sharon does and isn't guilty of genocide and omnicide. It's also true Carter doesn't advocate bring Sharon to justice. I would argue Camus would argue to bring Sharon to trial for genocide and omnicide.

      Copyright December 11, 2002 by Richard Radandt at richradandt@... page 1 of 1

      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.