>I agree vigorously with these words -- if I'm
>construing them right. But he packs a hell of a lot
>into that "who" clause, and the "to think of
>alternative ..." rather hangs out there. :-) Could
you >clarify a bit, Dwayne?
Well I'll try to flesh it out a bit. Hopefully, without getting needlessly wordy.
Perhaps a personal anecdote will provide illustration
Although it's become fashionable in some sectors of the lefty/progressive world to do some Chomsky bashing (he's stodgy, he's stubborn, I've heard it all before, his writing style is dull) regardless of the merit of the criticisms I'll always be grateful to the Professor for writing "Deterring Democracy".
This book came into my life at the right moment and altered my perceptions forever more.
As you know, it's typical for students to follow the style of admired teachers before finding their own 'voice' (to use the cliche) and so it was with me.
When I'd speak with my All American friends and acquaintances about political issues - US foreign policy in particular - my approach was to challenge them on the facts, a "well, how about THIS" method of debate.
Facts are good and important but, when pitted against belief, they are often about as effective as nerf arrows against M1 tanks. It took me a long time to realize this and change my angle of argument. I don't concede on the facts but I don't brandish them like throwing knives.
For example...
One of my co-workers is, by his own description, a "Mr. America kind of guy". He loves his country. of course, he supported War Plan Iraq because, like so many others, he genuinely believed that his President and Secretary of State had no other motivation except the defense of the nation. If they said that Iraq was sitting on a pile of deadly weapons that threatened the world, this must be true.
Instead of bashing him over the head with a fact hammer and assuming the high and mighty posture of the illusion free oracle, I simply pointed out to him a few instances from America's past when the government was, as the gentle saying has it, 'less than truthful'. I suggested, again without speechifying and posturing, that there may be complex motivations aside from a sincere desire to defend our 'way of life. 'In you own life you've done selfish and destructive things (who hasn't) of which you're not proud; why do you think these 'leaders' possess differently structured minds?"
Corporate life offers rich material for comparison. Everyone who's worked has witnessed the rewarding of the stupid, the sinister and the conniving. We've also seen organizations do incredibly stupid and self destructive things - based upon the beliefs of the owners/rulers. These common experiences provide good conceptual anchors for discussions of the actions of beloved national 'leaders'.
"Is it really possible," I asked him, "that so many other people at home and around the globe see no danger, no justification for invasion, and only a few men in Washington know more than them all? Are they all silly, or stupid or unable to accurately perceive a threat from a nation that's actually in their backyard? Why are we the only ones who feel threatened?"
"And," I pointed out "by removing the government of Iraq the Bush administration has made the US directly responsible for the health, security and well being of approx. 24 million people. Do you feel up to the challenge of rebuilding a country? Because, in some way or another, we're all involved - even if it's just at the level of taxation to support the effort. You're a father; how do you think an Iraqi father, deprived of the means to support his family, afraid for the safety of his children and wife, receiving no help from the Americans, feels? How would you feel in his place? "
You see by now, I hope, the pattern: discussions built upon the questioning of premises supported by examples from ordinary, everyday life. When appropriate, hard facts are introduced (Hussein was supported by the US and so on) but the facts do not precede the perceptual ground work.
The goal is to talk with people not to them. Not always possible (some folks are too Bill O'Reilly-ized to reason with) but more possible than many of us think.
DRM
__________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Calendar - Free online calendar with sync to Outlook(TM). http://calendar.yahoo.com