Re: [Sartre] Heidegger, Sartre, Bush who's the traitor to the working class
- Hi, Richard
I read all three of the submissions. You are quite right to link politics to
philosophy. I am in agreement with you over Bush and Sharon. The critical
questions are how is it that millions of Americans give tacit support to
destructive politics? How is it that Kissinger and Sharon can get away with
war crimes? If Satre was alive today, he would engage in polemics to oppose
what is planned in the Middle East and support the struggle of Palestinians
for freedom. Not to do so would be to live in bad faith.
>From: "Richard Radandt" <richradandt@...>_________________________________________________________________
>Subject: [Sartre] Heidegger, Sartre, Bush who's the traitor to the working
>Date: Mon, 20 Jan 2003 15:41:16 -0800
>Forty plus million people in the United States voted, are voting, or will
>vote for George Bush and Dick Chaney. These people all own at 12th grade
>education and they believe what the man says in print and in speech. Most
>of these people could use better medical care, better retirement benefits,
>better housing benefits, better education benefits, and decent wages and
>working conditions. They are getting none of these from the Bush
>administration. The United States president achieves the distinction by the
>German Justice minister of receiving a title of a Nazi and she looses here
>job. George Bush is wasting United States money to prepare and stage a war
>against Iraq. The last time we had a war with Iraq we killed over 200,000
>Arabs in less than a week. To me this is genocide and omnicide. No one
>seems to oppose this then and not now. Remember Bush is a graduate of
>Princeton and I would assume he to has read, Mein Kamp, one doesn't become
>president of the Untied States by writing poetry and clipping the grass in
>one's backyard. He knows exactly what Bernie Ebbers, Kenneth Lay and Ariel
>Sharon are doing and he approves of it in his silence. Third, George Bush
>is the leader of the Republican Party and he didn't resign when he became
>president. He has done little to elect or nominate more democratic Judges,
>prosecutors, cabinet secretaries, United States Senators and
>representatives, or governors, or CEO's of corporations. Never once in his
>actions does George Bush ever say he's sorry, he's wrong, or he apologizes.
>In fact, one would expect now that he's in his third year of the presidency
>he would at least have the courage and decency to resign. Now I'm not sure
>the kind of president either Heidegger or Sartre would make for the United
>States, but I would consider them over George Bush or Ariel Sharon, or
>Bernie Ebbers or Kenneth Lay.
>My feeling is Heidegger isn't difficult to understand as he relates to the
>everyday experience one discovers in a daily newspaper or in a discussion
>to buy groceries or just getting along with the other. Oh, I see Heidegger
>very much into politics and fiction.
>I will agree the average person in the United States probably isn't aware
>of Heidegger or do they read him. This is a failure of our democracy and
>it's a failure of the immigrants who come to this country to make a buck
>and nothing else.
>I don't see much use in comparing Sartre and Heidegger as if I'm going to
>wear socks I need one for the left foot and one for the right foot. I wear
>Heidegger on the right and Sartre on the left. If Dick Chaney and George
>Bush were socks, I would always go bare foot without socks. Heidegger is a
>poet and he's a country poet and not a big city boy. One must read about
>European criticism to grasp this point.
>Copyright January 20, 2003 by Richard Radandt at richradandt@...
>page one of one
>[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Stay in touch with MSN Messenger http://messenger.msn.co.uk
- In a message dated 1,22,2003 6:16:17 AM Central Standard Time,
> Hi, RichardSaleh. I believe that the Palestinians have been given a raw deal. However,
> I read all three of the submissions. You are quite right to link politics
> philosophy. I am in agreement with you over Bush and Sharon. The critical
> questions are how is it that millions of Americans give tacit support to
> destructive politics? How is it that Kissinger and Sharon can get away with
> war crimes? If Satre was alive today, he would engage in polemics to
> what is planned in the Middle East and support the struggle of Palestinians
> for freedom. Not to do so would be to live in bad faith.
> Best wishes
whether supporting or not supporting the Palestinian political cause in any
way defines good or bad faith...that would be so debatable now, and as for
Sartre, well, we will never know what he, a man who himself seemed to reserve
the right to change his own political mind might do.
Bush, Sharon, Kissinger, and the "millions of American who give tacit
support" if they did not, they do now have much human fodder for the cannons
Still, but respectfully pissed about 9-11, the Palestinian response to 9-11,
and the what is now becoming daily human bombs visited upon civilians.
Respectfully. Daniel /O/
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]