Comments on The Symptom of a Disease is Not the Cause?

Go to Why?Add a commentGo to The Symptom of a Disease is Not the Cause?

Archiew,
If you came to inspire me to embrace the "racist" doctrine of George Bush then you have failed! And you are well within your right to move on. But do not suggest that I am not committed to the survival of all humanity with your condesending use of Cliche`! Good luck and God Speed!

posted by Glennb on July 13, 2005 at 8:01 AM | link to this | reply

Well, Glennb
Then go to it; take a class if you feel you need it. Your post clearly relates the two; you merely clarified in your last post the nature of that relationship.

Sheesh! It's our language, kid; learn it!

BTW; I won't be making more comments, I don't mind closed minds, but if there is no key and the hinges are welded, then . . . . . . . .

posted by archiew on July 13, 2005 at 7:39 AM | link to this | reply

Archiew,
I am now convinced Americans do not understand English! That quote does not "relate" resistance to Imperialism! The quote "pairs" resistance with Imperialism. It suggest that even though imperialism or any other form of oppression can give rise to a resistance movement the "connection" is unrelated.

posted by Glennb on July 13, 2005 at 12:30 AM | link to this | reply

Huh?
You did:

    Archiew,
    Then you must accept "resistance" as legitimate opposition to "Imperialism"!

    Posted by Glennb on July 10, 2005 at 10:17 PM (permalink)

posted by archiew on July 12, 2005 at 12:31 AM | link to this | reply

Archiew,

Who related "resistance" to imperialism? Certainly not I! Are you still tying to tie success to Empires? Then why have they all been discredited as nothing short of "controlled genocide"! Trying to destroy the dignity of "cultures", other than European! We have a long way to go! And reverse is not in my plans!

 

posted by Glennb on July 11, 2005 at 3:57 PM | link to this | reply

Resistance?
There is no logical connection; you make many unfounded assumptions when you relate resistence to imperialism. An empire need not be evil, as all the Star Wars movies have implied. The British Empire, for example, was not an evil empire. Not perfect, true, but not evil.

posted by archiew on July 11, 2005 at 6:39 AM | link to this | reply

gleennb, let's savour it over a bottle of diet pepsi!

posted by kingmi on July 10, 2005 at 10:36 PM | link to this | reply

Kingmi,
Great! Let's celebrate! Your place or mine?

posted by Glennb on July 10, 2005 at 10:26 PM | link to this | reply

Writeroflight,
Again you bring the same old garbage! How many Iraqis have you spoken to about their standard, of living under Saddam Hussein? Come to my "Neighborhood" and ask me about my living conditions under George Bush! Can I get some help?

posted by Glennb on July 10, 2005 at 10:25 PM | link to this | reply

glennb, we agree at last!

posted by kingmi on July 10, 2005 at 10:24 PM | link to this | reply

Kingmi,
You are talking to the wrong person! I am not of the belief that there was always electricty and cell phones! Civilization develops over time. Restricting a group's access to economic peace is a "White" man's doctrine! Not mine!

posted by Glennb on July 10, 2005 at 10:22 PM | link to this | reply

Archiew,
Then you must accept "resistance" as legitimate opposition to "Imperialism"!

posted by Glennb on July 10, 2005 at 10:17 PM | link to this | reply

glennb, No, I am trying to get across that I have a higher moral plane

than administrators and teachers of the caucasion race, who believe that minorities should be treated just exactly the same as white children. To do this is to educate in the most restrictive capacity.  For example, take an immigrant family newly-arrived from Mexico.  We put the child in clean, well-lit classrooms with up-to-date teaching methods and texts, but all in English.  It is absurd to thnk that this is equal and fair treatment.  We are repeating the mistakes of the last 50 years, and I'm all over it!

If you can't call that non-race neutral, then you, as a product of the failed public schools, bear witness to my point as a living example.

posted by kingmi on July 10, 2005 at 9:31 PM | link to this | reply

Glenn scores a goal - at the wrong end of the field!
"Bondage in any form is corrupt humanity that should and will be violently rejected when peaceful means are exhausted!"

EXACTLY!!!

You do realize, don't you, that you just destroyed your whole schtick against the war?

"Bondage" describes perfectly the state of the Iraqis under Saddam, what with torture chambers, executions, crushing of dissent and all. The U. N. tried its "peaceful means" for years without any success whatsoever. And now you're having multiple litters of kittens because someone has "violently rejected" Saddam's bondage of his people after the peaceful means of the United Nincompoops were exhausted?

posted by WriterofLight on July 10, 2005 at 9:13 PM | link to this | reply

But . . .
The British did govern, and set up local governments as well. Also, we are not exploiting resources or we would be taking the oil from Iraq, and, sadly, we are not doing that.

Iraq and Afghanistan are both now independent nations. Iraq, their independent government, just recently, requested that we prolong our stay there.

Certainly not imperialism by any difinition. If I were in charge, and you might be glad I am not, when invading a country, and winning, I would "own" that country, mould it into whatever I needed for it to be, and maybe in a few decades grant it independence. Were I President Bush and Congress, Iraq and Afghanistan would both now be states, or at least territories, of the United States.

posted by archiew on July 10, 2005 at 3:00 PM | link to this | reply

Archiew,

Great insight and comment! But "dominate" by force for the purpose of exploitation, without the requisite responsibility for governing is the intent of most "Imperialistic" Doctrine. Once resources are depleted and humanity ravaged, most "Imperialistic" Powers will move to the next conquest.

An "Imperial" Power implies voluntary servitude to a nation or it's leadership! See the British Empire!

posted by Glennb on July 10, 2005 at 10:13 AM | link to this | reply

I'm a bit uncertain . . .
that yo are using the word "Imperialism" in it's dictionary meaning in your piece, particularly as you speak of the U. S. and Great Britain. If we were an Imperial Nation, we would be governing those nations of which you speak, and we are not.

Please present evidence that we are imperialistic, according to the actual meaning of the word.

NOTE: I wish we were more imperialistic.

posted by archiew on July 10, 2005 at 8:19 AM | link to this | reply

Jackkerouac,

It is within our power to stop the progression of "Evil and Injustice"! Not even God Almighty can reverse their ravages on our humanity.

Welcome to Blogit, I hope your stay is long and well!

Thank you for the visit and comments!

posted by Glennb on July 9, 2005 at 9:57 AM | link to this | reply

Wordwizard,
A Person's past is a clear window into his Soul. A vow to poverty should not be requirement for service, but I do agree, "profiteering, greed, hatred should be disqualifiers!

posted by Glennb on July 9, 2005 at 9:48 AM | link to this | reply

curious-
I dropped in to read you and your blog was reassuring. I saw Blair on CSPAN yesterday and I have to admit I was intrigued by the way he spoke, but I need to do more research to have anything factual to say. As for the past issues of this country I am disgusted, I mean I truly cannot put myself where other people have been even to begin to understand. I just don't know HOW it was acceptable and where that "thought process" was born in the sense of "non-humans." I'll be checking in on your words.

posted by jackkerouac on July 9, 2005 at 8:22 AM | link to this | reply

And the only solution on this planet...
is that everyone takes personal responsibility for who they vote for, and take great care in electing leaders. I suggest leaders should qualify themselves for leadership by the following; a) 30 years unpaid community service before they're allowed to run for election. That should eliminate all but those who truly want to serve. b) Have a thorough understanding of ethics, history, psychology and have the educational qualifications to prove it. c) There is evidence of high integrity.

posted by Wordwizard on July 9, 2005 at 6:07 AM | link to this | reply

Kingmi,
For some reason your comments do not appear "race" neutral! But I will not say they are racist. There is this implication that you have a higher moral plane than the "non-caucasins" races of the Planet. That represents the of scourge of Colonialism.

posted by Glennb on July 9, 2005 at 5:53 AM | link to this | reply

glennb, very thought-provoking. I take no issue with the slavery question.

Fact is, I still get accused every few years of failing to inform administrators of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Yes, Latino children have a right to least-restrictive classroom environment too.  The problems we face today in the classroom are exactly the same as the ones we faced, and failed to confront, through the last fifty years.  I find myself on the front line of this battle, eduacating hispanic immigrant children, and am trying not to repeat the mistakes made in attempting to educate black America. I like making new mistakes.

But I do take issue with your statement regarding imperialism and colonialism.  The favors granted to Italy, Poland, Russia are the same as we get, namely freedom from attack, freedom from oppression by the islamic revolution.

posted by kingmi on July 8, 2005 at 9:10 PM | link to this | reply

Ms N Dependence,
Thank you for the read!

posted by Glennb on July 8, 2005 at 8:56 PM | link to this | reply

Great post!

posted by Transcendental_Child on July 8, 2005 at 5:46 PM | link to this | reply