[Vision2020] The crazy side of the line

[Michael]

Keely,

 

But all this analysis does is make broad cultural 'hypocrisy' (on just one
point) the ultimate evil; but this can't be. Hypocrisy (saying all men are
free but not fully acting accordingly), can't be worse than the actual evil
in question (ie slavery).  Right?

 

Further, each culture is going to have its own unique sins; and the South,
with its very high ideals would undoubtedly fall into the ditch of
hypocrisy; the American Indians fell into their own ditch, which I would bet
wasn't the ditch of hypocrisy.  Hypocrisy in a culture assumes respectable
standards; there must be high standards to speak and not act according to.
No doubt this is the reason the Pharisees were chastised so by Jesus; they
had the law, yet did not keep it. But note, they were singled out so because
they were the religious leaders.  And in this respect, I'm open to have the
religious elite of the South rebuked for any hypocrisy.  But in doing so, we
must assume a generally respectable culture as the backdrop--perhaps this is
why hypocrisy is not a charge made very often from within our own culture
against our own culture.  We don't even have the self respect to make this
sort of charge anymore. 

 

Michael Metzler

 

 

 

 

Two points, Kai --

 

First, the civilizations you mentioned were not thought of as Christian
nations, nor did they refer to themselves as such, unlike the South.

 

Second, the things you wrote about happened elsewhere, not in the United
States, where "all men are created equal, endowed by their Creator with
certain inalienable rights . . . "  -- or at lest we said so, no matter how
little we apparently meant it in the beginning.

 

All history is intriguing and no more or less so because of slaveowning or
other reprehensible practices, but "intriguing" and "respectable" are
different characteristics, and labeling them as one or the other says
entirely different things.

 

keely

 

From: "Kai Eiselein, LatahEagle Editor" <editor at lataheagle.com>

To: <vision2020 at moscow.com>

Subject: [Vision2020] The crazy side of the line

Date: Mon, 28 Nov 2005 17:14:50 -0800

 

"In response to Keely, Michael wrote: "And I'm not sure why you should be
allowed dogmatism about all the evils of the culture of the South if I'm not
allowed to think there was something respectable about it."

 

"Now we have finally hit on the main frickin' point. The reason we can be
dogmatic about the moral benefits of contemporary society over the pre-Civil
War south (or north, for that matter) is SLAVERY! Slavery is a line in the
sand, Michael, and you cannot justify it without standing on the crazy side
of that line."

 

Joe

 

Soooooooo, does the fact that the Greeks and Romans owned slaves make
Aristotle and Cicero preclude the fact they great philosophers?

Does the fact that slaves were used to build the great pyramids, make them
any less a wonder of engineering?

Is the history of the Toltecs, Aztecs or Mayans any less intriguing because
they, too, owned slaves?

Why does it have any bearing on the fact that Robert E. Lee was by most
accounts honest to a fault, loyal to his troops and brilliant miltary
strategist?

If slavery is the "line in the sand", perhaps all of the writings of the
ancient philosophers should not be taught. Perhaps the pyramids of Egypt and
America along with the Parthenon and the Coluseum should be razed.

There is no difference, slavery is slavery. It was and is evil in all its
forms. To hold one's banner saying "Lee was evil" while saying "Aristotle
was great" is hypocrisy.

History is written in black and white, life is lived in shades of grey.

 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/vision2020/attachments/20051128/b7003ec6/attachment.htm