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

Re: [existlist] Moral Foreign Policy

Expand Messages
  • drQ
    and where are all the poems Mary Joe once posted romancing peace!!!? I admire the ability of some of you guys out there for self deception!! makes life alot
    Message 1 of 11 , Nov 28, 2003
    • 0 Attachment
      and where are all the poems Mary Joe once posted romancing peace!!!? I admire the ability of some of you guys out there for self deception!! makes life alot easier!
      ----- Original Message -----
      From: jerryjfortin@...
      To: existlist@yahoogroups.com
      Sent: Friday, November 21, 2003 7:53 PM
      Subject: Re: [existlist] Moral Foreign Policy


      Excellent response Mary Jo!

      Brutality, the first word you choose to restate or should I say further
      develope your points, is just that, brutal. Harsh, cold, calculated, perverse,
      call it what you will it is still a very personal aspect of aggression. It is a
      description of human behavior indicating excessive use of force. When I used
      this terminology, my intent was to instil a vision of arrogant reality enforced
      upon an issue, nothing more. The old adage the truth hurts comes to mind.

      As to your statement;
      "an impossibility. nations .. which are essentially
      conglomerates of humans based on a common set of
      rules/dicta (otherwise known as the constitution, in
      most of them) .. act analogous to a multi-cellular
      living creature (here cells are an analogy to
      functional humans) .. with each cell that knows (or
      eventually ends up at) its place in the general scheme
      of things ! & just like a multi-cellular organism, it
      has a sense of self that must be preserved, interests
      that must be guarded, boundaries that must be
      protected & if possible furthered .. to increase it's
      chances of survivability. Ergo, the very rules of
      darwinian natural selection that 'pick & choose' the
      fittest amongst competing organisms, also will 'pick &
      choose' the fittest amongst competing nations - &
      nations COMPETE for survival .. & there's no such
      thing as a HEALTHY COMPETITION, when it is for
      survival !"

      Nations are not conglomerates of humans, there are simply the geographically
      defined territories of ruling classes of individuals. Many so-called nations,
      at least their ruling classes, have no interests in the plight of the humans
      contained within the borders of its territories. Nations,or if you will
      societies, are in fact only defined by the most dominant individuals within it.
      They control and the population follows. Even in a democracy this is true.
      Having said of all of this, is it not safer to conclude that the common perception
      of nations is flawed. It is in reality the individuals who are in actual
      control, not the political parties not the national governments, just a few
      select people have the actual power to govern It is those individuals in
      positions of perceived power that cause and create the difficulties that nations have
      in terms of international relations. Nations do not declare war, people do.
      Of those people that do declare wars, which they themselves do not fight in,
      the reasoning that lead them to believe that war was inevitable is indeed
      designed to protect and enhance only their own survivability. Given the
      opportunity to vote for a war, by and large humanity would not do so. Of course there
      are some isolated groups that favour the use of violence as a political tool,
      I refer to these people as barbarians, large groups of individuals would never
      place their families and themselves at risk given the choice, unless the
      threat was literally at the gate of course.

      So to return the gauntlet, survival is only relevant to the individual, a
      nation can die, but its people can survive. Therefore the nation is only a
      perception, not a reflection of its individual citizens. It is then safe to say
      that morality is the perogative of the individual, not a means of international
      diplomacy. For a nation to "inflict" another nation with its version of
      morality is simply wrong. Nations can have no morals for they are only perceptions
      not human beings. A nations morals are only an expression of the individuals
      morals who are empowered to govern that nation, so that it is not a national
      morality but an individual perception of morality that is used.
      Internationally accepted juriprudence does not enforce one will against another where no
      crime exists. Considering these things, a moral foreign policy is not possible
      or relevant in terms of international relations. What is true for one
      individual may not be true for another, such a foreign policy is in fact morally
      bankrupt.

      Jerry


      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]



      Our Home: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/existlist
      (Includes community book list, chat, and more.)

      TO UNSUBSCRIBE from this group, send an email to:
      existlist-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

      Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/





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