> I am so sick of you people. Self-righteous, irresponsible,
consumed
> with envy ...
Really, Frederick, I do think that statement out of order. Why does 'envy'
keep showing its unappealing head in these debates? Me, I'm more consumed with
sorrow than anything else. I have to confess I can barely watch the news or read
a paper anymore, it feels to me as if a totalitarian world-view is invading
everywhere, not just Afghanistan. I've always respected the commitment to free
speech and debate in US culture, surely any healthy culture needs
dissent?
But now it seems that's all a thing of the past.
David Bircumshaw
Leicester, England
Home Page
A Chide's Alphabet
Painting Without Numbers
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Saturday, December 01, 2001 10:36 PM
Subject: Re: from Salon
> Lawrence Upton wrote:
> >
> > Dear
Frederick,
> >
> > There is no such thing as an ideal world.
When I hear the words "In an ideal
> > world", I know someone has
reached for their revolver and doesn't like to
> > admit to it.
>
>
> > There would be an international court if the US had not
opposed it. I know
> > all about the real world; I am just trying to
define it without the schmaltz
> > and sentimentality.
>
>
> > When you say "My task... is to compromise with and make use of
other
> > beliefs", it is a meaning of "belief" of which I was
previously unaware.
> > Your words remind me of the joke about faking
sincerity.
> >
> > And, then, buried top and bottom in a pile
of irrelevancies, we have it:
> > "those American deaths are more
important"
> >
> > Thank you, but what a surprise that you
admit it.
> >
> > You say: "To you... the above must be highly
unpleasant." You know little of
> > me, and you don't get it right. Let
me correct you: It isn't particularly
> > unpleasant, no more so than
faeces. It is arrogantly smug. It is knowingly
> > hypocritical. It is
culpably and murderously stupid.
> >
> > You say: "The other
statement was that your family were pacifists in World
> > War II." I
did not make that statement. Nor do I see how the actions taken
> > by
others before I was born could possibly predict my willingness to agree
>
> or disagree with anything.
> >
> > And you are wrong: we
*have agreed on something, and after that the rest
> > becomes
irrelevant. I accused you of the racist belief that USAmerican
> >
deaths are more important than others and you have confirmed it. I had
never
> > heard it *explicitly from a professional USAmerican who is
interested in
> > poetry.
> >
> > Perhaps something
has changed, though it seems a position appropriate to a
> > citizen of
a country whose government deliberately bombs the non-combatant,
> >
uses radioactive and other poisons, uses cluster bombs, shoots to kill
>
> instead of taking prisoners and suspends legal rights - why, I wonder,
did
> > you speak in favour of those who resisted Nazi Germany?
>
>
> > I see no hope for us
> >
> > L
>
>
> > -
>
> Oddly enough, I see some hope for
you. Our brave soldiers - and, don't
> kid yourself, they are quite
brave; but they are effective soldiers and
> try, as Patton said, to kill
more than they are killed - as well as, if
> you'll excuse the expression,
yours, will bring justice to bin Laden and
> his associates: the only kind
of justice now available. And thereby
> preserve you and your kind's
freedom to sentimentalize. And to distort:
> precisely nothing in
what I said indicates racism. The US government
> and people can be
mobilized to take what action necessary to avenge our
> victims - not,
unfortunately, the other victims you and I have
> mentioned. The
only way to change that, to transform a capitalist power
> into a force
for unalloyed good, is to bring force to bear. Real force,
> not
your empty (as I say, airless) moralism. Al-Qaeda and the Taliban
>
are not that force; their aims are entirely different. But we've
been
> over this.
>
> I am so sick of you people.
Self-righteous, irresponsible, consumed
> with envy ... I will say,
however, that I'm sorry I read your statement
> as suggesting your family
were pacifists.
>