[lit-ideas] Re: It means nothing, absolutely nothing...

  • From: "Julie Krueger" <juliereneb@xxxxxxxxx>
  • To: lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Date: Sun, 19 Oct 2008 22:29:00 -0500

And yet you said:

"Are not rallies the beginnings of oppression?  They are the coming together
of like minds, and that's the beginning of everything political."

It sounds as though you perceive of rebellions against oppression inevitably
becoming oppression, which would come full circle and trigger rebellion, ad
infinitum.  What am I missing?

On Sun, Oct 19, 2008 at 9:09 PM, Mike Geary <atlas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

>
> JK:
> >>You seem to be saying that all "movements" of like-minded people coming
> together around a common set of ideas or ideals can only lead to oppression
> on the part of those like-minded people. <<
>
> That is not at all what I meant to say.  The question I meant to pose was
> how does any one ever know that they are right enough to confront the whole
> culture?  To try to stop others from doing what they think should be done?
> I don't know.  I've only ever said I can't do this (whatever), never that I
> should stop you from doing whatever.   But there surely comes a point where
> you must try to stop others from doing whatever as in Nazi Germany --
> Vietnam??  At what point?
>
> Mike Geary
> Memphis
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> *From:* Julie Krueger <juliereneb@xxxxxxxxx>
> *To:* lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> *Sent:* Sunday, October 19, 2008 6:43 PM
> *Subject:* [lit-ideas] Re: It means nothing, absolutely nothing...
>
>  What if a core part of the idea people gather round is one of standing
> against oppression?  Is this the equivalent of vehemently preaching that
> human values are essentially subjective, while having to admit that your own
> values which consider human values subjective are in and of themselves
> subjective?  Is there a way around that?  Is it a given that all human
> functioning -- whether on an individual or societal level -- is subject to
> the extreme of the value or ideal du jour?  Every time this sort of topic is
> danced around I think of Derrida's Tympanim.
>
> Some examples lead to something akin to the ridiculous -- did emancipation
> oppress those who wished to own slaves?
>
> Did the WW II victory oppress those who wished to implement genetic
> cleansing, and who wished to obliterate non-aryans?
>
> Maybe another way to ask it is this:  At what point does freedom become
> oppression?  Is it inevitable that freed people will become oppressors?
>
> Is this an ethics issue?  Logic?  Sociological?  Political?  Something
> different?
>
> On Sun, Oct 19, 2008 at 6:13 PM, Mike Geary <atlas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>> I've been thinking about David's post, too, wondering where I place
>> myself. A non-violent, ultra-liberal, to be sure as far as labeling goes.
>>  But where would I draw the line between allowing Nazi rallies and taking up
>> arms (legally, hopefully) against them?  Are not rallies the beginnings of
>> oppression?  They are the coming together of like minds, and that's the
>> beginning of everything political.  So totalitarian, Nazi, fascist ideas, as
>> ideas, are not dangerous, only their implementation (within the framework as
>> I see it) are to be forbidden.  So, oppression isn't to be stopped at the
>> beginning, rather, somewhere down the line, when it looks like there's a
>> real chance that the implementation of such ideas, programs, agendas, etc.,
>> might actually become a reality.  And when do you know that the line has
>> been crossed?  How many deaths?  How many times?  The consequences are
>> formidable.  Just ask William Ayers.  I too was there, not as a Weatherman,
>> but as a fellow traveler.  I was much less brave, less headstrong, less
>> daring, but no less convinced.  I hated America all through Vietnam.  I
>> thought our country was evil on the scale of Nazi Germany.  But what can one
>> do as an individual?  I just avoided it all, taught school.  I think now I
>> should have stepped over the line, as our Founding Fathers did and enter the
>> unknown.  As Lawrence would say of me, I was a coward, and he'd be right.
>>
>> Mike Geary
>> Memphis
>>
>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Ursula Stange" <Ursula@xxxxxxxxxx>
>> To: <lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>> Sent: Sunday, October 19, 2008 3:55 PM
>> Subject: [lit-ideas] Re: It means nothing, absolutely nothing...
>>
>>
>>
>> Yes, when you stand on principle, you don't always have a nice clean place
>>> to stand.
>>> Ursula
>>>
>>> David Wright wrote:
>>>
>>>> "The trouble with fighting for human freedom is that one spends most of
>>>> one's time defending scoundrels. For it is against scoundrels that
>>>> oppressive laws are first aimed, and oppression must be stopped at the
>>>> beginning if it is to be stopped at all."
>>>>    -- H. L. Mencken
>>>>
>>>> as always and ever,
>>>> d.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> To change your Lit-Ideas settings (subscribe/unsub, vacation on/off,
>>> digest on/off), visit www.andreas.com/faq-lit-ideas.html
>>>
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To change your Lit-Ideas settings (subscribe/unsub, vacation on/off,
>> digest on/off), visit www.andreas.com/faq-lit-ideas.html
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Julie Krueger
>
> Visit www.VoteForChange.com. Register to vote and help spread the word.
>
>


-- 
Julie Krueger

Visit www.VoteForChange.com. Register to vote and help spread the word.

Other related posts:

  1. Home
  2. lit-ideas
  3. Archive
  4. 10-2008