Help! I need a cogent, measured response to this.

[DrZeeLit]

Okay, it's a "friend's" blog. And I'm aghast, beside myself, upset... you get the picture. So, I'll probably get all emotional and logic will fly out the window.

Soooooo.... HELP! Please. Wha...Wha....What response would cut her to the knees... in a really intelligent way? Yeah...she's in 30's, a fundamentalist, going back to college, has read a few books, likes history.

Here goes:

Over at XXX, there's a thread about the Pledge of Allegiance and how some judge ruled that the phrase "under God" was unconsititional. That thread is now seven pages long and ties in with an alarming trend in my Arab history class.

Apologizing for being in power, for getting to set the standard and write the history. When did that start happening, exactly? While I completely understand that the west has imposed its culture on the world and a large part of the world doesn't like it...what am I sorry for? Yes--Westerners colonized and imperialized the world. Yes, missionaries clubbed native religions over the head. Yes, gold and jewels and oil were exported while gifts of disease and democracy and McDonalds were left behind. This has been going on for centuries--it's not a new phenomena.

Look, someone has to be in power, and absolutle power corrupts absolutely. Asking perfection and political correctness from a world power is a lot like pissing in the wind. It's not that I don't understand all the moaning and groaning over the mistakes and mistreatments--I do! But where did the understanding that "to the victor go the spoils" get dropped? I think you can understand the swings and balance of power without taking it personally. You can not like the president or parts of your past, or even the wording of the Pledge or the Declaration of Independence or your hundred dollar bill, but if 'someone' has to be in power, in the end evaluation, don't you want it to be the country you live in, or the civilization you're a part of? What am I missing? Fill me in!


HELP ME ANSWER!
And thanks so much....

[BlueEyedSon]

1. "Being in power?" If (big "if") that is true, the Constitution protects

the minority form the "tyranny of the majority".

Your god today, allah tomorrow, capiche?

[stopbush]

2. Your friend is making many, many false assumptions here.

It comes down to her expressing her *opinions* as facts. These are hollow arguments - the setting up of strawmen for easy knockdown. Such opinions excuse the actions of despots around the world who are operating in someone's "country you live in."

This is battered wife/Stockholm syndrome at its worst.

[Der Blaue Engel]

3. "What am I missing? Fill me in!"

A heart? A soul? A brain?

So, because we've raped and pillaged, we should be allowed to keep what we've raped and pillaged and shouldn't feel bad about it, because it's just the way the cookie crumbles.

:wtf:

Sorry, I don't have anything logical to offer either...this makes me boiling mad. I'm sorry to be insulting a friend of yours; she must have some redeeming quality somewhere.

[DrZeeLit]

6. No problem. See... I feel exactly like you do. That's why I asked for

help. She's a nimnal. I'm pissed at her attitude and it's scary for me to even think that she's reached this point in her life, not a kid, and still thinks like this.

Oi!

So, instead of YELLING and losing it..... I am considering all these VERY HELPFUL, measured, intelligent responses.

Thanks....!!!!!

[EstimatedProphet]

4. So the argument is...

it's OK that we're imperialists, because someone else would be?
Fallacy-tragedy of the commons. If we don't behave as assholes, that doesn't mean that other people will have to to fill in the gap. That's stupid. This argument is just a way of shirking responsibility.

[ayeshahaqqiqa]

5. Has this person ever read world history?

Though often the conqueror imposes his culture on a fallen people, it is not always so, nor is a conquest always brutal. There have been notable exceptions to this "rule", including the rule of the Moors in Spain, which tolerated all the "people of the book". Saludin, the great king who conquered Jerusalem, didn't massacre the Europeans who had taken over the city (although that is what the Eurpeans had done when they had 'won' that Crusade), but instead let them leave or stay. Emperor Akbar of India tried to bridge differences between all the faiths by having craftsmen of all faiths build Prataprasiki (probably spelled wrong), a city of peace for all people. I am familiar with these three examples because of my study of Sufism, but I am sure there are examples in other places and times as well.

[Bluerthanblue]

7. ok, if she IS a fundie, and it sounds like she's not-

nothing in her words speak of god- but, the bible speaks very loudly about selling your soul for earthly gain.

To the winner goes the spoils is exactly what Caesar was all about- not Jesus- not God. Does she want to be on top??? Maybe she forgets that in order to be on top you have to walk over the bodies of many to get there, and continue to pile up bodies to remain there-
What have you gained if that is the case? Better to sit on a pumpkin and have it all to yourself than be crowded on a velvet cushion. She's talking like a Darwinist- not a fundie. Jesus said, to who much is given, much will be required- and DO NOT store up for yourself treasure on earth, do not worry about what you will eat, or wear, because God takes care of all the creatures of the earth, and are you less than they? What good do I have if i gain the whole world, and lose my soul in the process??? ENVY, GLUTTONY, and GREED are sins that America is rife with.- and the hypocritical 'compassionate' christians, look more to themselves, their own needs, and the greedy notion that no one should receive anything they don't 'earn' in the eyes of the 'religious bigots'.
What good is living in a country that has what it has at the expense of all the rest of the world??? Can she sleep at night with that on her conscience?? What RIGHT do we americans have to tell the world what is 'good' or 'right' or 'acceptable'???

I'm ashamed to be an american today- more so than ever before- and were my ancestors who came here on the Mayflower, fought in the revolution, civil, WW I and II, and Vietnam asked if they'd do it all again, given what we have become- they'd say- HELL NO- They fought against tyranny, not for it.

SHAME on us. And god has NOTHING to do with what is being done-
It is human greed, envy, lust and power. and it is going to bring this nation down- forever, not from without, but as many of our earlier statesmen said, from within.

The sooner the better in my opinion.

[SlipperySlope]

8. How about this approach...

Tell her you agree with her, that assuming someone has to be in power, your glad it is your own country and your own culture.

Then ask her why, as long as we are in power, we shouldn't do more with the opportunity. Ask her if she thinks we are doing a good job of living up to our own ideals. Ask her if she thinks the principles this country was founded on are being upheld and respected. Ask her if she thinks America stands for "truth, honor, and justice"?

Then point out that this might be our one chance in history to set a shining example for all time, and wouldn't she prefer that we use this opportunity to show the world our best side, instead of our worst?

[mandyky]

9. If your friend is referring to Iraq

You cannot "to the victor go the spoils" and we went to war to liberate Iraq at the same time. This bi-polar attitude is what fuels the insurgency in Iraq.

This is 2005, and hopefully humanity in general, the US specifically has moved past the "convert and kill" mentality of old.

If this is your friend it speaks ill of you.

[DrZeeLit]

10. Whoa! That's unfair. Shame on you. Don't paint me with that brush.

You know nothing of me.

My "friend" is floundering here. I want to reply. I think that says NOTHING about me, except that I am concerned.

You need to apologize for that one.

[mandyky]

12. I'll clarify

If I had a friend who wrote a blog like this, I would wonder why I never noticed such attitudes before. To me a friend is some one I know really well. I have aquaintenances and even relatives like this but not friends. Yoour friend doesn't seem to be floundering, she went from the pledge to "to the victor go the spoils". I am not saying "your friend" is your fault or that you are like them.
But how would you feel if you went out with a loud mouth friend who started throwing racial epithets around, not sure I'd claim them as "a friend". To me what she said if it is referring to Iraq is just as offensive. I hope you understand I wasn't blaming you, especially if this is out of character for the friend.

[Selatius]

14. For my part, I could not, with conscience, consort with that type of perso

It is people like your friend who has historically persecuted and killed people like me because we are guilty of holding the "wrong ideas" as far as how people should relate to each other in this world. Your friend is an appalling example of what happens when people do not feel for one another.

[Ksec]

11. Using only the hard constitutional argument

favors the new ruling of doing away with the Pledge.

Using emotion and "patriotism" favors their arguments.

Its a question of how you decipher arguments in your head, logically or emotionally.

[Selatius]

13. Your friend has adopted the "I have my piece of the cake. Fuck off!" way

Allow me to break it down point-by-point:

Look, someone has to be in power, and absolutle power corrupts absolutely. Asking perfection and political correctness from a world power is a lot like pissing in the wind.

Asking "perfection and political correctness" is not pissing in the wind. It is a mark of a person who has principles and is willing to stand up and fight for them regardless of the odds. Using your logic, Jesus should have never tried at all. Gandhi should have never tried. Martin Luther King, Jr. should have never tried.

Everybody who has fought against something much more powerful than themselves should have given up using your logic from the slaves of Africa and the workers fighting for a day's work in the dangerous mines and steel mills and the American colonists against a colonial superpower and the Jews who participated in the Warsaw Ghetto Uprising to the South Africans who struggled and died against Apartheid.

It's not that I don't understand all the moaning and groaning over the mistakes and mistreatments--I do! But where did the understanding that "to the victor go the spoils" get dropped?

Just because you have the power to take away the lives of people, to take away what rightfully belonged to them does not mean that you should do it or that you should keep what you kill. This is the philosophy of tyrants and thugs, not of an enlightened people. It is no longer acceptable in the modern era. It is immoral and against the principles of an enlightened people.

I think you can understand the swings and balance of power without taking it personally.

Oh, I think the people who watched their homeland conquered, their family members killed would be singing a different tune. Jews, Blacks, Native Americans, and others would probably find it hard "not to take it personally." Perhaps if you were not of European origin and came from a people that was once beaten down and colonized by a European superpower, you would understand, but for some reason you don't feel for them or care for their views. Can you not feel for others, have empathy for them? Do you lack that ability?

It seems your problem is that you have not learned to "walk a mile in another's shoes."

You can not like the president or parts of your past, or even the wording of the Pledge or the Declaration of Independence or your hundred dollar bill, but if 'someone' has to be in power, in the end evaluation, don't you want it to be the country you live in, or the civilization you're a part of?

This is all well and good, but if everyone adopted the philosophy of keeping what you kill, eventually, you will be done in by the philosophy you advocated when you are finally brought down and conquered. The notion of the Golden Rule was established in the first place in an attempt to break the cycle of violence in the realization that people would be better off mutually cooperating for survival instead of trying to destroy each other, but you have not listened for the fact that you attempt to justify the opposite. For that, you are less of a person for it.

[DrZeeLit]

15. Yipppppeeeee! I have a cogent, intelligent winner. THANKS all of you....

THANKS SO MUCH!!!!!

I have learned a great deal.
I, too, was considering the initial "victory" of Hitler and his "spoils" -- the Jews of Poland and more... .how would she see that one? But then I thought... everybody uses Hitler, oi, not again.

I am humbled by all of you -- I tend to get so emotional over these issues.

AND... I want to teach rather than froth at the mouth.

So, again... thank you very very much.
I appreciate your time and talents.

Selatius, bravo.
Everyone else, bravo, too.