|
|
| Re: Palestinian university students’ trip to Auschwitz causes uproar (1182658) | |||
 |
|||
| Home > OTChat | |||
|
[ Read Responses | Post a New Response | Return to the Index ] |
|
||
|
Re: Palestinian university students’ trip to Auschwitz causes uproar |
|
|
Posted by 3-9 on Sun May 11 15:20:32 2014, in response to Re: Palestinian university students’ trip to Auschwitz causes uproar, posted by Nilet on Sun May 11 11:11:15 2014. And they will deal with it in what way...?Since they have never proposed a solution to that hypothetical problem, you will have to ask someone in the Israeli government. Yet again, you declare a double standard without offering even the slightest attempt to justify it. Do you simply not believe that everyone is created equal? I guess I would say yes. Now, here's a question to you. If you have an extra room or apartment that you promised a friend will always be available for them to live in, then a total stranger comes and demands you give him that place to live in, are you going to give it to him? Note that the place is not on the market, the stranger just happened to hear you had an empty room. I'm sure plenty of black people who lived through segregation would care to disagree with you. And I'm sure all the ones who were raped, killed, etc., by widespread rampaging bands of people of a different religion or tribe would probably think segregation was the least of their problems. My point was that the Soviet Union, which controlled a good swath of Asia, has collapsed and its former territories are now generally better off for it. So don't use countries in Europe as an example of how much better Asia is doing. China has abandoned its failed attempt at "communism" and has also abandoned the idea of totalitarianism— over the last few decades, it's gone from economic stagnation brought on by the policies of a single moronic ruler and complete control of citizens' private lives to an economic powerhouse with limited personal freedom. Myanmar's military dictatorship has officially ended and the country's human rights record has shown signs of improvement. Thailand has had some troubles, but nothing to suggest human progress is moving backwards (and Thailand by itself couldn't disprove a global trend anyway). China is still pretty totalitarian, in that they don't brook dissent and keep a hammerlock on the media. Maybe not to the level of Mao, but still. And being an Uighur or a Tibetan tends to suck more than usual. Being a Muslim in Myanmar is not very good thing these days. Thailand isn't moving forward either, with a festering racism problem. And nobody said Thailand by itself is disproving a global trend, just that the trend isn't as widespread as you claim. Russia represents a good chunk of Asia and it's doing better than in the Soviet days. I haven't looked up the details of all former Soviet territories in Asia, but some improvement over the Soviet Union seems present by and large; I'm pretty sure Kazakhstan and Tajikistan are showing obvious signs of improvement. But only one has had free elections, and to say that they're doing better than under the Soviets is a really mixed bag. Definitely not "all" or "most". And your point is...? Your statement: "Moreover, you did a nice job of confusing a subset of humanity defined by geography with a subset defined by an ideology." My original point here was that trying to change bad policies and end injustices (on whatever scale they may be) is not a futile endeavour because bad policies and injustices are not unshakable aspects of human nature. As of now, I consider this point to be proven. Although given the circumstances of Israel's creation, I would tend to think you believed it all along. No, I just think your approach to solving those problems is incredibly naive, flawed, and will end up causing more problems than it solves, at least in the short term. No need to be perfectionist. I'm willing to accept reducing Nazism from "absolute ruling power over a country" to "a bunch of dudes whose opinions are completely irrelevant to the vast majority (which never even gets to see them)" as sufficient improvement. France still has its monarchists, Germany still has its Nazis, America still has its pro-slavery advocates, and none of them matter because all of them are tiny minorities justifiably viewed as crazy by everybody else. My point is that human nature hasn't really changed, all we've done is knock out a particularly egregious example of it. The fact that such an evil philosophy as Nazism or various other racist tendencies are embraced by people who otherwise aren't mentally ill or mentally defective proves it. So Israel can take in hundreds of thousands of refugees in a short time span, but only if they're Jewish? How does Judaism make the refugees easier to accommodate? OK, since that was too much for you: the founders of Israel saw a need for a Jewish haven, and planned a solution they felt was doable and fulfilled that need. They were able to carve out a small country with fairly limited resources, but it's enough to accomplish that goal in the long term. However, in order to do that, they have to limit who can enter and stay in the country, or else the solution they created would become unfeasible in a much shorter span of time. The solution isn't perfect, but it's the best one they have for now. Now do you get it? |
|
|
|