Hi-jack fall-out

[Ken Hanly]

The manner in which Nathan has cut this implies that he is responding to
some remarks I have made. None of my remarks remain. Nathan is replying to
remarks made by Yoshie I believe. However I agree with Yoshie. I dont see
how Nathan's remarks even relate to the issues raised. He refuses to
recognise the symbolic importance of the act to those without jets and
weapons of mass destruction but subject to the power of a superpower and its
allies. His idea of rationality would be some utilitarian calculation of
means to ends. If this is the work of islamic fundamentalist it makes no
sense to think of the action in these terms. Think of Kant's view that it is
better that the whole world perish than than one murderer not be punished
with death--or something like that. Now Kant was not exactly an enemy of
reason or rationality but this would seem to be out of  proportion.

Cheers, Ken Hanly

----- Original Message -----
From: Nathan Newman <nathan at newman.org>
To: <lbo-talk at lists.panix.com>
Sent: Wednesday, September 12, 2001 6:30 AM
Subject: Re: Hi-jack fall-out


> >----- Original Message -----
> >From: "Ken Hanly" <khanly at mb.sympatico.ca>
> >I do believe that the American people have collective responsibility for
> the
> >harms perpetuated in their name, but that is a very different thing from
> >recognizing the barbarism involved in the mass slaughter that occurred
> >today.  I am not a pacifist or even against all "terrorism" in the sense
> >that proportional targetted response against civilians may be justified
on
> >occasion where no other outlets for resistance are possible.  But this
kind
> >of disproportionate mass murder warrants little response that will lead
to
> >any questioning of the US's role.
>
> -Disproportionate mass murder is exactly what the U.S. government
> -specializes in, both through its own actions (e.g., economic
> -sanctions of Iraq) and its proxies (consult, for instance, William
> -Blum on this topic). Over many decades, the
> U.S. government has funded, trained, and/or equipped *untold numbers*
> of soldiers, mercenaries, and/or paramilitary death squads in the
> USA, Asia, Africa, Latin America, & the Middle East.
>
> Again the equivalence between every act of the US government and the
> culpability of innocent civilians.  And proportion is not just a question
of
> comparing body counts (my point on eye for an eye) but of effectiveness.
> Murder in war is only justified to the extent it will end greater murder
and
> promote justice.  The futility of this act in that regard removes any
> proportion from the act.
>
> How does it work?  We count every person killed in the world by the US,
> subtract our casualties in that time, and terrorists have a free "kill
every
> Yankee they want" card until the global quota to even things up is
reached?
>
> I guess this is why so many people on this list found the mass murder of
> Kosovars acceptable.  They were put in the "Yankee" column, so the Serbs
> were just using up the quota.
>
> On the other hand, I find the mass murder of East Timorese, Palestinians,
> Iraqis, Kosovars, and residents of the financial district all equally
> appalling.  None justify the other and only proportionate response by
anyone
> to end death and misery is ever justified.
>
> Anything else is a war crime.
>
> -- Nathan Newman
>
>