Double standards and Moral Relativism

[jbg]

Got news for you, your simplistic, patronizing depicture of Africans is bloody racist. What do you think these people are the helpless victims you portray them as? Clearly you do not know all Africans you just assume though you can write them all off as victims. There are many successful Africans who are independent and making quality lives for themselves and others.

Get real. Africa is full of may kinds of people of which some are corupt, sociopathic politicians who choose to rape and plunder their own people. Yes it is a tragedy people starve and are trapped in poverty. Yes foreign investors and financial interests tied to oil,diamonds, natural resources, have a vested financial interest but what about the stooges they find who have no problem turning on their own people? Do you care to just ignore that?

I agree with parts of the post I quoted, and disagree about others. The topic I am opening has nothing specifically to do with Egypt. This post has to with the implicit imposition of duties of morality upon countries such as Canada, the U.S. and Israel that are not matched by similar duties upon most other countries in the rest of the world.

People are quick to yell "racism" when pointing out that the Continent of Africa is largely bereft of competently self-governing entities. Similarly, when it comes to China, the brutal occupation of Tibet, an area that threatens no one, is excused. Israel, on the other hand, is regularly excoriated for exercising control, whether by occupation or access limitation, on areas that severely endander its peoples' safety. Abu Ghraib is a cause celebre. Suicide bombings in which hundreds senselessly die are not. The U.S. is taken to task for collateral damage from air raids, while internecine bloodbaths are A.O.K. with the people who make a journalistic or board career of attacking Canada, the U.S. and Israel.

The hypocrisy on global warming is even more spellbinding. Many people are quite prepared to force the Western nations, particularly the U.S., Canada and Australia to take massive hits in their ability to produce goods, and are quite prepared to have payments for credits made to China and India. No one is suggesting that they limit their unrestrained pollution.

And yet Harper is attacked for opposing Kyoto/Copenhagen and supporting Israel. Amazing.

Edited February 11, 2011 by jbg

[bjre]

Similarly, when it comes to China, the brutal occupation of Tibet, an area that threatens no one, is excused.

Similarly, when it comes to European colonist, the brutal occupation of Americas, Australia, areas that threatens no one, is excused.

[Black Dog]

Many people believe this OP is rife with strawmen.

edit: what's this doing in federal politics anyway?

Edited February 11, 2011 by Black Dog

[jbg]

edit: what's this doing in federal politics anyway?

Attacks on Harper for his relative consistency. If you can get the mods to move it somewhere you deem appropriate by my guest.

[Black Dog]

Attacks on Harper for his relative consistency. If you can get the mods to move it somewhere you deem appropriate by my guest.

You might want to add a link so people coming in know what conversation prompted you to build this Wicker Man of a thread.

[jbg]

You might want to add a link so people coming in know what conversation prompted you to build this Wicker Man of a thread.

I respect you as a poster but I don't post for your convenience.

[Saipan]

Similarly, when it comes to European colonist, the brutal occupation of Americas, Australia, areas that threatens no one, is excused.

You live in the deep past.

May as well bring out cannibals of Borneo and Java - not so long ago.

When Australia was colonized even North America had cannibals.

And while on the subject, Africa has cannibals TODAY. Pygmies of Central Africa brough the problem to the attention of UN.

Edited February 11, 2011 by Saipan

[bloodyminded]

I agree with parts of the post I quoted, and disagree about others. The topic I am opening has nothing specifically to do with Egypt. This post has to with the implicit imposition of duties of morality upon countries such as Canada, the U.S. and Israel that are not matched by similar duties upon most other countries in the rest of the world.

People are quick to yell "racism" when pointing out that the Continent of Africa is largely bereft of competently self-governing entities. Similarly, when it comes to China, the brutal occupation of Tibet, an area that threatens no one, is excused. Israel, on the other hand, is regularly excoriated for exercising control, whether by occupation or access limitation, on areas that severely endander its peoples' safety. Abu Ghraib is a cause celebre. Suicide bombings in which hundreds senselessly die are not. The U.S. is taken to task for collateral damage from air raids, while internecine bloodbaths are A.O.K. with the people who make a journalistic or board career of attacking Canada, the U.S. and Israel.

The hypocrisy on global warming is even more spellbinding. Many people are quite prepared to force the Western nations, particularly the U.S., Canada and Australia to take massive hits in their ability to produce goods, and are quite prepared to have payments for credits made to China and India. No one is suggesting that they limit their unrestrained pollution.

And yet Harper is attacked for opposing Kyoto/Copenhagen and supporting Israel. Amazing.

At bottom, this is another case of special pleading, in which the most powerful and influential forces are being cast as victims.

If it's so bloody difficult to have power over other human beings--often agaisnt their will--then the answer is clear: stop taking power for oneself.

But people loooove power! so it ain't gonna happen.

Well, ok, fine; but at least don't whine about being too harshly criticized! Good Christ. It's not only Israel who whines like a little bitch over this matter...the Defenders of the United States behave the same way: "Stop criticizing us!"

Or look at Canadians...oooh, we're so fucking morally upright. Point out the fact--the fact--that this is a nationalist myth, and so carries little or no actual information (exactly like the "home of the brave," a misnomer if ever there was one), and they'll throw tantrums.

And why?Well...because those who will always and in every case defend the most powerful interests don't like criticism; they like obedience.

Fuck that noise.

Edited February 11, 2011 by bloodyminded

[Saipan]

You might want to add a link so people coming in know what conversation prompted you to build this Wicker Man of a thread.

"Ritual and magic are pervasive in Congo, and the result is often comic. Earlier this year, riots broke out after allegations of magical penis theft (honestly, it's noded; the lucky were merely shrunk) swept the country's capital. Over a dozen highly dangerous sorcerers were arrested before they could steal another manhood. But for the pygmies, the primitive superstitions - often called juju in West Africa - could be much more horrific. In the north east of the country, reports emerged of fighters forcing pygmies to eat one another, and of eating them themselves. The United Nations investigated and found the allegations to be true."

http://everything2.com/title/Cannibalism+of+pygmies+in+Congo

[jbg]

Or look at Canadians...oooh, we're so f**** morally upright. Point out the fact--the fact--that this is a nationalist myth, and so carries little or no actual information (exactly like the "home of the brave," a misnomer if ever there was one), and they'll throw tantrums.***

F*** that noise.

You must feel really strongly about it to curse about it.

[bloodyminded]

You must feel really strongly about it to curse about it.

Sure, I guess.

[PIK]

Similarly, when it comes to European colonist, the brutal occupation of Americas, Australia, areas that threatens no one, is excused.

Well let go back a little farther, we have a indian band that say the land is theirs, but what about the indian band that had that land before , and lost it to the current one because they were slaughtered and thier land stolen. So lets forget about the past and fixs thing for the present. Edited February 11, 2011 by PIK

[Black Dog]

I respect you as a poster but I don't post for your convenience.

How about the convenience of every other poster? I'm not asking for any special favours.

Anyway, putting that aside, let's look at your claims:

People are quick to yell "racism" when pointing out that the Continent of Africa is largely bereft of competently self-governing entities.

What people?

Similarly, when it comes to China, the brutal occupation of Tibet, an area that threatens no one, is excused.

Excused by whom?

Israel, on the other hand, is regularly excoriated for exercising control, whether by occupation or access limitation, on areas that severely endander its peoples' safety.

This would only be weird if the people criticizing Israel accepted your premises that the occupation is about safety.

Abu Ghraib is a cause celebre.

Understandably so.

Suicide bombings in which hundreds senselessly die are not.

Meaning what?

The U.S. is taken to task for collateral damage from air raids, while internecine bloodbaths are A.O.K. with the people who make a journalistic or board career of attacking Canada, the U.S. and Israel.

Again, what people? Please provide citations.

The hypocrisy on global warming is even more spellbinding. Many people are quite prepared to force the Western nations, particularly the U.S., Canada and Australia to take massive hits in their ability to produce goods, and are quite prepared to have payments for credits made to China and India. No one is suggesting that they limit their unrestrained pollution.

Many people, huh? Can you quote some of them?

[Moonbox]

What people?

Excused by whom?

Read his post again:

the people who make a journalistic or board career of attacking Canada, the U.S. and Israel

This would only be weird if the people criticizing Israel accepted your premises that the occupation is about safety.

It's really irrelevant what they accept. Israel doesn't need anyone to BELIEVE they feel threatened in order to feel threatened and take steps to protect themselves. A lot of the legitimacy for the Israeli position comes from the fact that its neighbours are all human rights catastrophes and because we have a fairly long history of attacks, threats and aggression against Israel to back it up.

Again, what people? Please provide citations.

Wikileaks video of Apache mowing down people in the street. Very embarrassing. Possibly taken VERY out of context.

Many people, huh? Can you quote some of them?

What sort of debating tactic is this? Would you not agree that the US, Canada etc are criticized for their environmental policies? Did you follow any of the coverage on Copenhagen? Have you seen how much flak Canada takes for killing baby seals? Do us the favor and stop playing dumb. It doesn't take an epic mental effort to look these sorts of things up yourself, and nobody wants to have to cite every single statement they make.

[Black Dog]

Read his post again:

the people who make a journalistic or board career of attacking Canada, the U.S. and Israel

And who are they?

It's really irrelevant what they accept. Israel doesn't need anyone to BELIEVE they feel threatened in order to feel threatened and take steps to protect themselves. A lot of the legitimacy for the Israeli position comes from the fact that its neighbours are all human rights catastrophes and because we have a fairly long history of attacks, threats and aggression against Israel to back it up.

You're missing the point. That may be, like, your opinion, man, but the people who are criticizing israel aren't necessarily doing so because they are opposed to Israel "exercising control...on areas that severely endander its peoples' safety" as jbg states.

Wikileaks video of Apache mowing down people in the street. Very embarrassing. Possibly taken VERY out of context.

What's that a citation of? Now, I'll accept that the U.S. is criticized for "collateral damage" (or , in the incident you're referring too, outright murder), as it should be. However, jbg's claim rests on the belief that the people criticizing those actions are also "A.O.K" with "internecine bloodbaths. The sum of the claim demands some evidence.

What sort of debating tactic is this? Would you not agree that the US, Canada etc are criticized for their environmental policies? Did you follow any of the coverage on Copenhagen? Have you seen how much flak Canada takes for killing baby seals? Do us the favor and stop playing dumb. It doesn't take an epic mental effort to look these sorts of things up yourself, and nobody wants to have to cite every single statement they make.

First: again, in order to prove a double standard you need to show that their are two contradictory positions at work. You're only halfway there.

Second: it's a basic rule of debate that the person making the claim is the one to provide evidence to support it. If one is going to make the effort of starting a post examining double standards, I would hope they'd be equipped with something more than vague generalizations ("Many believe..." "Some people..."). There's not even any anecdotal evidence, let alone any real analysis, so why should we believe a word of it? To coin a phrase, what sort of debating tactic is this?

Edited February 11, 2011 by Black Dog

[WIP]

I agree with parts of the post I quoted, and disagree about others. The topic I am opening has nothing specifically to do with Egypt. This post has to with the implicit imposition of duties of morality upon countries such as Canada, the U.S. and Israel that are not matched by similar duties upon most other countries in the rest of the world.

Here come the Neocons with their false equivalency! How about the duty of Canada, the U.S. and Israel to allow Egypt to become a democracy instead of any continued efforts to try to maintain their strategy of propping up the local despot?

People are quick to yell "racism" when pointing out that the Continent of Africa is largely bereft of competently self-governing entities.

Oh, and why is that? For your information, the Colonial Empires never left Africa....or Latin America, or Asia etc.. The only difference today is that instead of installing political colonial governments, the standard operating procedure is to install the useful despot, who will keep the populace in order providing he gets generous kickbacks from the multinational corporations that remove natural resources to be shipped off to Western markets. If Africa is largely bereft of competent self-governments, the invisible hand of globalization is a large reason why. Just as with Egypt and Tunisia, the prime objective of U.S. foreign policy is to support stable, reliable regimes regardless of how they deal with the locals.

Similarly, when it comes to China, the brutal occupation of Tibet, an area that threatens no one, is excused.

Excused by who?

Israel, on the other hand, is regularly excoriated for exercising control, whether by occupation or access limitation, on areas that severely endander its peoples' safety. Abu Ghraib is a cause celebre. Suicide bombings in which hundreds senselessly die are not. The U.S. is taken to task for collateral damage from air raids, while internecine bloodbaths are A.O.K. with the people who make a journalistic or board career of attacking Canada, the U.S. and Israel.

Strawman alert! Are you whining because Israel is criticized for expanding settlements in territories gained through warfare, and the U.S. is criticized for indescriminately killing civilians, using torture, extraordinary rendition, and other human rights abuses? Or are you claiming that suicide bombings don't receive condemnation?

The hypocrisy on global warming is even more spellbinding. Many people are quite prepared to force the Western nations, particularly the U.S., Canada and Australia to take massive hits in their ability to produce goods, and are quite prepared to have payments for credits made to China and India. No one is suggesting that they limit their unrestrained pollution.

The hypocrisy is on your side. We are taking a hit courtesy of the oil/gas/coal lobby, which collects billions in capital cost allowance and other tax incentives, while making sure that any money spent for alternative energy development gets labeled as an unproductive burden on taxpayers. Right now, China is buying up new technology for wind power, and advanced solar cells, and when we have to shift to alternative energy, we will have to buy that from China also, thanks to your friends in the oil industry!

And yet Harper is attacked for opposing Kyoto/Copenhagen and supporting Israel. Amazing.

He's opposing Kyoto because he's a lapdog of the tar sands interests, and he's shifted the traditional Canadian Mid East position from honest broker to lapdog for whatever the Israeli Government wants to do. Both criticisms are more than justified.

[bloodyminded]

Here come the Neocons with their false equivalency! How about the duty of Canada, the U.S. and Israel to allow Egypt to become a democracy instead of any continued efforts to try to maintain their strategy of propping up the local despot?

Oh, and why is that? For your information, the Colonial Empires never left Africa....or Latin America, or Asia etc.. The only difference today is that instead of installing political colonial governments, the standard operating procedure is to install the useful despot, who will keep the populace in order providing he gets generous kickbacks from the multinational corporations that remove natural resources to be shipped off to Western markets. If Africa is largely bereft of competent self-governments, the invisible hand of globalization is a large reason why. Just as with Egypt and Tunisia, the prime objective of U.S. foreign policy is to support stable, reliable regimes regardless of how they deal with the locals.

Excused by who?

Strawman alert! Are you whining because Israel is criticized for expanding settlements in territories gained through warfare, and the U.S. is criticized for indescriminately killing civilians, using torture, extraordinary rendition, and other human rights abuses? Or are you claiming that suicide bombings don't receive condemnation?

The hypocrisy is on your side. We are taking a hit courtesy of the oil/gas/coal lobby, which collects billions in capital cost allowance and other tax incentives, while making sure that any money spent for alternative energy development gets labeled as an unproductive burden on taxpayers. Right now, China is buying up new technology for wind power, and advanced solar cells, and when we have to shift to alternative energy, we will have to buy that from China also, thanks to your friends in the oil industry!

He's opposing Kyoto because he's a lapdog of the tar sands interests, and he's shifted the traditional Canadian Mid East position from honest broker to lapdog for whatever the Israeli Government wants to do. Both criticisms are more than justified.

Yes, and yes. Nicely said.

[Shwa]

...This post has to with the implicit imposition of duties of morality upon countries such as Canada, the U.S. and Israel that are not matched by similar duties upon most other countries in the rest of the world...

But shouldn't there be imposition of moral duty since we claim enlightenment over most other countries and cultures in the rest of the world? Either we are more morally enlightened, and recognized as such by the ROTW, or we are no better than them and can claim only to be no better. There is no double standard at all, we are simply being held accountable for our claims. I don't think there is anything in your post that implies otherwise.

[Saipan]

Yes, why are we supporting Chinese military despots?

[myata]

Bah...I'm confused! By "duties" we mean, refraining from meddling or interference? Or perchance direct force? "Duty" to follow one's own preaching? I dunno...sounds more like common decencyt to me