Tuesday, February 19, 2008
Two articles, seemingly unrelated at first glance, share a common thread: Liberals cast people as victims in a way the conservatives often don't understand or agree with.
The first piece, by Thomas Sowell, talks about the liberal media "supporting" the troops, but casting them as victims. The point is made directly and convincingly.
The second, a review of Taxi to the Dark Side, by Roger Ebert, makes a statement that had me wondering: The "conversations with the American torturers themselves are the most heartbreaking". I understand the point and sympathize with the young men that thought they were doing their duty and suffered mental trauma as a result, but can that mental trauma really be equated to the brutal torture of a prisoner? I have not seen the film and so am not commenting on the content of it per se, instead commenting on what seems to be the liberal baby-boomers' propensity for rearranging moral values and priorities via victimization. By way of contrast, in all the World War II documentaries I've ever seen, I never heard any Allied soldier say anything remotely like "those poor Japanese prison guards that tortured us" or "those poor Germans that worked at Auschwitz". Who the real victim was was never in doubt. Any mental trauma that the aggressors suffered would be considered secondary if at all.
Additionally, regarding violent behavior in general, there is a theft that goes on that must be acknowledged: The aggressor steals the victim's right of choice. This provides a clear distinction between the two parties involved. Arguments to the effect that various aggressors, for whatever reason, had no choice are sometimes true, but frankly, overused. If one looks at leaders widely thought of as examples of courage and compassion, we find that they made the moral but difficult choice and accepted the consequences. So much of what I detest in the 60's Liberals is that they won't accept any consequence at all for their actions and thus argue that they have no choice in any difficult matter. Two words spring to mind: selfishness and cowardice.
Let me add this: I am, myself, a late baby boomer. Selfishness and cowardice have cost me dearly in my life. To realize this truth about myself is to realize that I am human after all and that I will always fail, again and again. I must treat myself with compassion so that I can go on training so that I can live better and not fall into despair.
And treating myself with compassion is the first step to treating others with compassion.
Especially those who help me train by showing me my own faults.
The first piece, by Thomas Sowell, talks about the liberal media "supporting" the troops, but casting them as victims. The point is made directly and convincingly.
The second, a review of Taxi to the Dark Side, by Roger Ebert, makes a statement that had me wondering: The "conversations with the American torturers themselves are the most heartbreaking". I understand the point and sympathize with the young men that thought they were doing their duty and suffered mental trauma as a result, but can that mental trauma really be equated to the brutal torture of a prisoner? I have not seen the film and so am not commenting on the content of it per se, instead commenting on what seems to be the liberal baby-boomers' propensity for rearranging moral values and priorities via victimization. By way of contrast, in all the World War II documentaries I've ever seen, I never heard any Allied soldier say anything remotely like "those poor Japanese prison guards that tortured us" or "those poor Germans that worked at Auschwitz". Who the real victim was was never in doubt. Any mental trauma that the aggressors suffered would be considered secondary if at all.
Additionally, regarding violent behavior in general, there is a theft that goes on that must be acknowledged: The aggressor steals the victim's right of choice. This provides a clear distinction between the two parties involved. Arguments to the effect that various aggressors, for whatever reason, had no choice are sometimes true, but frankly, overused. If one looks at leaders widely thought of as examples of courage and compassion, we find that they made the moral but difficult choice and accepted the consequences. So much of what I detest in the 60's Liberals is that they won't accept any consequence at all for their actions and thus argue that they have no choice in any difficult matter. Two words spring to mind: selfishness and cowardice.
Let me add this: I am, myself, a late baby boomer. Selfishness and cowardice have cost me dearly in my life. To realize this truth about myself is to realize that I am human after all and that I will always fail, again and again. I must treat myself with compassion so that I can go on training so that I can live better and not fall into despair.
And treating myself with compassion is the first step to treating others with compassion.
Especially those who help me train by showing me my own faults.
# posted by goldpython @ 8:04 AM 
