[lit-ideas] Re: The continuation of Realpolitik -- a counterfactual

  • From: "Mike Geary" <atlas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • To: <lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Fri, 23 May 2008 22:46:22 -0500

>>If we choose to allow the restriction of others' freedoms based upon 
>>accordance with our own beliefs, or societal norms  Then, we must be willing 
>>to submit the allowance/restriction our own freedoms to the beliefs of 
>>others, or societal norms<<

Yes, I agree.  And, of course, it's inevitable that freedoms will conflict, 
because value systems differ so widely.  But if you believe that the best way 
to restrict freedoms is through democratically determined means, meaning that 
all restrictions are always open to change, then there's always hope that 
restrictions you find repressive or unwarranted can be amended or supplanted.  
The wish for a society where we could all just do our own thing is not likely 
to happen anytime soon since nearly everyone feels threatened by "strange" 
behaviors.  What's to be done?  Exposure to the other is the best help, I 
believe.  Take away the "strangeness".  Maybe there should be a law that 
everyone must live in a port city until they don't give a damn what anyone does.

Mike Geary

  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: David Wright 
  To: lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx 
  Sent: Friday, May 23, 2008 8:31 PM
  Subject: [lit-ideas] Re: The continuation of Realpolitik -- a counterfactual

  What degree of judgement or moderation is to be found in Thou Shalt Not...?  
Only that of the person Thouing...



    On Fri, May 23, 2008 at 11:46 AM, David Wright <wright@xxxxxxxx> wrote:

      Actually, my intent is...

      clear as chocolate mousse,

    As with most either-ors, the distinction is overdrawn, leaving no room for 
degree, for judgment or moderation. Piffle.


    John McCreery
    The Word Works, Ltd., Yokohama, JAPAN
    Tel. +81-45-314-9324

  See Exclusive Video: 10th Annual Young Hollywood Awards

Other related posts: