>On Fri, 12 Oct 2001, Angelita Manzano wrote:
>
>
> > http://www.feminista.com/v4n6/craft.html
>
>
>So let me get this straight: it's elitist and obnoxious for
>people to be concerned about the death of innocent children
>in other nations? If you point out the horror and misery
>provoked around the world by U. S. foreign policy
>adventures you "hate" America?
>
>I feel like I'm in a Twilight Zone episode. Have people lost
>all capacity for rational thought?
>
>Miles
no it's elitist and obnoxious for the moron who wrote that to portray the US population as a bunch of ignoramuses who want to kill others for the sake of cheap prices at the pump with words like:
"ignorant population of so-called "innocent" citizens--who benefit tremendously on so many levels--claiming no sense of history or their own responsibility. Instead of introspection the "innocent" U.S. citizens can only wag flags."
the problem is that she's willing to use a structuralist lens in some areas, but not all areas. USers are culpable and there's no explaining how it might be that we have many people, right now, certain that we are saving Afghan women from the Taliban. The slightest bit of nuanced thinking applied to that claim ought to suggest to the moron who wrote the above that, apparently, people do care about other people's lives, no? they might be a little confused about how to do so and be very mistaken to think that dropping bombs will achieve that goal.
IOW, i think people were legitimately concerned about dropping bombs on Afganistan. But the administration and the media machine managed to effectively manufacture consent by feeding people RAWA-type docos and specials once every two or three hours on CNN.
i'm not saying that people are sheep or that we don't bear some responsibility for being lazy asses, but there are reasons why people don't have access to the kinds of information that would enable more critical thought on these matters.
there were 101 ways to say what she said without engaging in the elitist rhetoric she spewed.
kelley