I think Bush really does believe he is doing the best for others. He probably is trying to leave the world a better place. But I disagree that this leaves him, or anyone else immune from the tag “evil”, because of good intentions.

Consider some more clear cut cases:

Adolf Hitler believed he was doing good in wiping out the Jews. He believed it was good for Germany to have Lebensraum. He believed that the world would be a better place with one pure Aryan master race in charge. If you say he wasn’t evil, then you remove much of the meaning of the word. Yet I think if you were able to read his mind you would find out he honestly believed he was doing right.

Pol Pot believed he was doing good in going back to year zero. He believed that people would be better off without the corrupting effect of technology and education. Again, good intent in his own mind, but woefully wrong about the effects.

Osama Bin Laden believed he was doing good in killing thousands of Americans to bring attention to his cause and strike at the heart of the country he believed was oppressing Muslims. He honestly believed (as far as I can tell), that the world would be a better place if those thousands died. Again, good in his own mind, but terribly wrong in actuality.

I actually wonder if there are many people who knowingly do evil. Most people in these positions seem to have logical dissonance in thinking of themselves in this way, and begin rationalising their actions to themselves in a way that makes them the heroes. Or so it seems to me.

My own belief is that it is ok for people to harbour all sorts of terrible thoughts as long as they are not doing anything about it. I have no idea whether Bush is evil or not. I’m not sure I have the right to judge him either. But I do believe it is our acts that are evil, or wrong, or criminal – not our intentions. And the act of invading Iraq, and the execution of that act, seems to me evil: against international law, ill thought out, and with much misery in its wake.

As an old proverb has it – if wishes were horses, then beggers would ride. A man might imagine stealing a horse every day. He might even get up in the morning intending to, only to change his mind at the last minute. He is only a criminal when he actually does so.

I think Bush really does believe he is doing the best for others. He probably is trying to leave the world a better place. But I disagree that this leaves him, or anyone else immune from the tag “evil”, because of good intentions.

Consider some more clear cut cases:

Adolf Hitler believed he was doing good in wiping out the Jews. He believed it was good for Germany to have Lebensraum. He believed that the world would be a better place with one pure Aryan master race in charge. If you say he wasn’t evil, then you remove much of the meaning of the word. Yet I think if you were able to read his mind you would find out he honestly believed he was doing right.

Pol Pot believed he was doing good in going back to year zero. He believed that people would be better off without the corrupting effect of technology and education. Again, good intent in his own mind, but woefully wrong about the effects.

Osama Bin Laden believed he was doing good in killing thousands of Americans to bring attention to his cause and strike at the heart of the country he believed was oppressing Muslims. He honestly believed (as far as I can tell), that the world would be a better place if those thousands died. Again, good in his own mind, but terribly wrong in actuality.

I actually wonder if there are many people who knowingly do evil. Most people in these positions seem to have logical dissonance in thinking of themselves in this way, and begin rationalising their actions to themselves in a way that makes them the heroes. Or so it seems to me.

My own belief is that it is ok for people to harbour all sorts of terrible thoughts as long as they are not doing anything about it. I have no idea whether Bush is evil or not. I’m not sure I have the right to judge him either. But I do believe it is our acts that are evil, or wrong, or criminal – not our intentions. And the act of invading Iraq, and the execution of that act, seems to me evil: against international law, ill thought out, and with much misery in its wake.

As an old proverb has it – if wishes were horses, then beggers would ride. A man might imagine stealing a horse every day. He might even get up in the morning intending to, only to change his mind at the last minute. He is only a criminal when he actually does so.

I think we agree with the best/best you can be in a personal level. But in that striving you should be aiming to be the best. And as the Olympics go, it all stems back to wanting to be recognized as the best on the global stage. Cold war mentality stuff.

Okay, so I will probably start forgetting to check this commenting so… either we agree or we differ slightly, but alls good.

night

I think we agree with the best/best you can be in a personal level. But in that striving you should be aiming to be the best. And as the Olympics go, it all stems back to wanting to be recognized as the best on the global stage. Cold war mentality stuff.

Okay, so I will probably start forgetting to check this commenting so… either we agree or we differ slightly, but alls good.

night

I agree completely with the attitude: if you are going to do it, do it right. But being “THE BEST” is not always possible. MANY people play golf. They can’t all be THE BEST — are they all losers? Of course not. The attitude that anyone (or any country) that isn’t THE BEST is a loser .. that’s the attitude I find unhelpful. STRIVE to be as good as you can be in all things. Don’t think of yourself as a loser if you are not THE BEST.

The problem comes from misunderstanding what I’ve just written. Too many people think that what I’ve just written is equivalent to “You’re a winner .. don’t let anyone tell you otherwise.” NO .. all the self esteem crap .. is crap. If you’re not trying to be the best you can be, then you should not be satisfied with yourself. But if you ARE trying .. and you are not THE BEST .. it’s OK. THAT’S ALL I’M SAYING.

I agree completely with the attitude: if you are going to do it, do it right. But being “THE BEST” is not always possible. MANY people play golf. They can’t all be THE BEST — are they all losers? Of course not. The attitude that anyone (or any country) that isn’t THE BEST is a loser .. that’s the attitude I find unhelpful. STRIVE to be as good as you can be in all things. Don’t think of yourself as a loser if you are not THE BEST.

The problem comes from misunderstanding what I’ve just written. Too many people think that what I’ve just written is equivalent to “You’re a winner .. don’t let anyone tell you otherwise.” NO .. all the self esteem crap .. is crap. If you’re not trying to be the best you can be, then you should not be satisfied with yourself. But if you ARE trying .. and you are not THE BEST .. it’s OK. THAT’S ALL I’M SAYING.

Just the best, whatever we do… if you are going to do it, do it right and be the best. That is the way I live.

Night.

Just the best, whatever we do… if you are going to do it, do it right and be the best. That is the way I live.

Night.

The US is not even in the top 10 in the world in Education. What does that make us?

“Yes we are bent on being the best”

What does that mean? I mean .. to be the best in basketball I understand. You win more games. To be the best in education .. you score better on tests that show educational success. But .. just plain “being the best” … what does that mean? (This is a serious question.)

The US is not even in the top 10 in the world in Education. What does that make us?

“Yes we are bent on being the best”

What does that mean? I mean .. to be the best in basketball I understand. You win more games. To be the best in education .. you score better on tests that show educational success. But .. just plain “being the best” … what does that mean? (This is a serious question.)

I am going to recap on the few things I can remember after reading those:

Yes we are bent on being the best and while we are standing their as the best we are glad to make sure it is known, we are arrogant in that way. And I think most Americans are arrogant in believing that we can not fall, or that we will not. But if you are second you are a very skilled person that just lost. I mean second is first, first looser.

And is it any wonder why the world dislikes us? Nope… they dislike not only our politics but our culture in a lot of ways. So we can agree there. But on the why Americans are not pleased with Bush I would still point to the fact that when he was seen as a cowboy that would not take anything off anyone, his ratings were high… they dropped as the war (police state) lingered. And that happened because we did not aggressively pursue the enemy.

As for the ties to terrorism, yes they did have them but I do not believe that is why we went. We just toppled one group and he was on a roll and felt there was an immanent threat, as did the majority of congress. And yes the other two should have taken note since they are on our enemies list. I want them to take note that we feel that way about them. I think we should be more diligent on identifying Saudi and China.

And I think we should not just beat, but beat severly our compatition. We should strive to remain the super power. Others may be a force to be recconed with, but we are the super power.

And the UN has major issues and just because I do not think we should lose our sovereignty in our endeavor to build our global relations does not mean isolation. It means we have a forum for dialog but the UN strives (as quoted by daddy Bush and Kofe Annan) to be a global government. Not drinking cool-aid just stating the intention. So, while we should have a place for policy discussion I think that is better done in the traditional sense of packs and treaties than to put legs to a ‘system’ that try to declare it’s own sovereignty.

have a great weekend all….

I am going to recap on the few things I can remember after reading those:

Yes we are bent on being the best and while we are standing their as the best we are glad to make sure it is known, we are arrogant in that way. And I think most Americans are arrogant in believing that we can not fall, or that we will not. But if you are second you are a very skilled person that just lost. I mean second is first, first looser.

And is it any wonder why the world dislikes us? Nope… they dislike not only our politics but our culture in a lot of ways. So we can agree there. But on the why Americans are not pleased with Bush I would still point to the fact that when he was seen as a cowboy that would not take anything off anyone, his ratings were high… they dropped as the war (police state) lingered. And that happened because we did not aggressively pursue the enemy.

As for the ties to terrorism, yes they did have them but I do not believe that is why we went. We just toppled one group and he was on a roll and felt there was an immanent threat, as did the majority of congress. And yes the other two should have taken note since they are on our enemies list. I want them to take note that we feel that way about them. I think we should be more diligent on identifying Saudi and China.

And I think we should not just beat, but beat severly our compatition. We should strive to remain the super power. Others may be a force to be recconed with, but we are the super power.

And the UN has major issues and just because I do not think we should lose our sovereignty in our endeavor to build our global relations does not mean isolation. It means we have a forum for dialog but the UN strives (as quoted by daddy Bush and Kofe Annan) to be a global government. Not drinking cool-aid just stating the intention. So, while we should have a place for policy discussion I think that is better done in the traditional sense of packs and treaties than to put legs to a ‘system’ that try to declare it’s own sovereignty.

have a great weekend all….

An example: Let’s suppose government A refers to countries B, C, and D as EVIL and then unilaterally attacks country B. Should that government be surprised when countries C and D start ramping up their arsenals and take an even stronger stance against country A? Words matter.

But on the CRUSH subject: It does bother me that Americans are disappointed in our olympic athleltes if they don’t win more medals than any other country. Being incredibly good at something is not enough. If we aren’t the BEST, then we are losers. The first president Bush said in one of HIS SotU speeches that the US would be the top ranked country in the world in Math and Science by the year ???? (I don’t recall the year .. it doesn’t matter .. we didn’t reach the goal). It was a STUPID UNREACHABLE GOAL. It isn’t about being number 1. It’s about being competitive. It remains true that our world rankings in Math and Science (in grade school and particularly high school) is not anywhere NEAR the top in the world … the relevant fact is that we are not competitive. Our universities are among the best in the world. So are some of our high schools. But, on average, our educational system is severely lacking. It needs to be fixed (and the blame for this does not lie with either political party). We need to understand that no child left behind means that EVERY CHILD WILL BE ABLE TO READ, DO MATH, ETC. … it does not mean that every child will go to the 5th grade when their friends do. Some will be left behind to get the education that they will NEED to be successful in life. Social promotion is THE GREATEST EVIL in this country. It destroys lives. (Did I say we were getting off topic?) OK … I’ll stop.

An example: Let’s suppose government A refers to countries B, C, and D as EVIL and then unilaterally attacks country B. Should that government be surprised when countries C and D start ramping up their arsenals and take an even stronger stance against country A? Words matter.

But on the CRUSH subject: It does bother me that Americans are disappointed in our olympic athleltes if they don’t win more medals than any other country. Being incredibly good at something is not enough. If we aren’t the BEST, then we are losers. The first president Bush said in one of HIS SotU speeches that the US would be the top ranked country in the world in Math and Science by the year ???? (I don’t recall the year .. it doesn’t matter .. we didn’t reach the goal). It was a STUPID UNREACHABLE GOAL. It isn’t about being number 1. It’s about being competitive. It remains true that our world rankings in Math and Science (in grade school and particularly high school) is not anywhere NEAR the top in the world … the relevant fact is that we are not competitive. Our universities are among the best in the world. So are some of our high schools. But, on average, our educational system is severely lacking. It needs to be fixed (and the blame for this does not lie with either political party). We need to understand that no child left behind means that EVERY CHILD WILL BE ABLE TO READ, DO MATH, ETC. … it does not mean that every child will go to the 5th grade when their friends do. Some will be left behind to get the education that they will NEED to be successful in life. Social promotion is THE GREATEST EVIL in this country. It destroys lives. (Did I say we were getting off topic?) OK … I’ll stop.

Seriously. The attitude that being competitive (and successful) isn’t enough .. that we must not only be number ONE but must CRUSH all others .. is the stereotypically arrogant American attitude that makes us look like fools in the eyes of much of the world.

Carl, the point here is fierce economic competition (in a good way), not some sort of hateful/make their people starve kind of thing. People don’t dislike America for being strong economically, in fact it’s just the opposite. The world respects economic prowess and seeks to have it themselves.

So when I say “crush your competitors”, think MBA/business person. Think Japanese business person, or Swiss business person. It’s all the same and in good spirit.

No malice aqui.

Seriously. The attitude that being competitive (and successful) isn’t enough .. that we must not only be number ONE but must CRUSH all others .. is the stereotypically arrogant American attitude that makes us look like fools in the eyes of much of the world.

Carl, the point here is fierce economic competition (in a good way), not some sort of hateful/make their people starve kind of thing. People don’t dislike America for being strong economically, in fact it’s just the opposite. The world respects economic prowess and seeks to have it themselves.

So when I say “crush your competitors”, think MBA/business person. Think Japanese business person, or Swiss business person. It’s all the same and in good spirit.

No malice aqui.

Why must we CRUSH our competition (economically or otherwise)?

Seriously. The attitude that being competitive (and successful) isn’t enough .. that we must not only be number ONE but must CRUSH all others .. is the stereotypically arrogant American attitude that makes us look like fools in the eyes of much of the world.

RIck, you are right about this trait (arrogance) being shared by folks on both sides of the aisle. In one of his State Of the Union speeches, Bill Clinton implied that the United States (and only the United States) was an indispensible nation. Actual quote: “Let us do what it takes to remain the indispensable nation — to keep America strong, secure and prosperous for another 50 years.” Nothing wrong with wanting to be strong, secure, and prosperous. Something MINDBOGGLINGLY wrong with implying that other nations are dispensible. I spoke to a friend from Iceland the next day via IM and she had heard that and said that it was another example of the arrogance of the American government. She understood that it was the government and not the people that made the statement. What does most of the world know of the US? They know the rhetoric from the government that they see on the news (and they see only a PART of that). They know American music and movies. THIS is what their opinions of the US are based on. Is it any surprise that some distrust and/or dislike us? I’d like to think that if they knew the REAL America, then they would understand that we are a strong and caring people. That we want to raise our standard of living and are willing to work hard to do so — but NOT AT THE EXPENSE of the standard of living of others who are also willing to work hard to improve their own lives. IT IS NOT A ZERO SUM GAME! That is, for us to win it does not require others to lose.

While I’m writing …

” in bed with Saddam” … WE were supporters of Saddam at one point. and … IRAQ HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH THE WAR ON TERROR. (It does NOW … but it didn’t when we went in.)

Rick, it may be true that those you know are upset because we were too diplomatic, but this is NOT why the majority of Americans are opposed to Bush’s policies.