|
Edited on Thu May-14-09 08:30 PM by RandomThoughts
Ok this is not a simple topic, but Olbermann made a very good point, and it got me thinking.
Calling someone a Nazi, or a group Nazis is a form of labeling that allows for the simple comment, they are all evil. But we know that is never true. But what that view does is remove any empathy for an entire group. It literally makes everything done to them acceptable. They become non human, or not worthy of any feeling.
This is were it gets complicated.
And that's what the Nazis did.
And part of the narrative to stop the Bush administration was that they were acting like the Nazis. If you noticed the narrative it was really something outside of normal. Now in things like that, it is interpretation where they come from, so you ignore all but the good, and there was some bad there to. So I still think there was more then one side in the mix of things. But do you see the oddness of this.
Bush thought some people in Iraq were Nazis, and in doing that Bush's group were acting like Nazis, then out of the blue, a narrative called Bush group out on being like Nazis. I am not trying to be over religious and definitely not trying to claim righteousness, but after seeing the flow of the narrative, it makes me think of being judged by how you judge. Which considering the spectacular flow of the narrative, is a bit awe inspiring in itself.
But the main point I wanted to say is calling a group or person evil, or Nazi, or any other terrible thing, literally removes all empathy for the group by just giving them an evil label. It creates a separate subgroup that is a lesser group. And being perceived as lesser, people just want to destroy them, or sometimes enslave them. It forgets the fact that all life is sacred, and all people are good and bad. Even if you disagree with their view on religion, hating them, or trying to destroy them is not part of any religious doctrine I know of.
So I think my point is two fold, first to try and not call any group evil. But if I thought they were doing evil things, then it would be ok to mention that from my view, or even protect someone if they were trying to hurt someone else. But in all that, I would never have to hate or lose empathy for them. On the contrary, my interaction would be to offer my view on their action for lots of reasons, to maybe point out something they did not notice, or to offer an opinion they can think on. Or even create a situation they could reflect on. But I think it is best, as we are taught, to try and love your enemy.
I think on this alot, because of my view of some people in America right now, and although I think they should be held accountable, it is not for vengeance or hate, it is for other people. It actually has very little to do with them. Although it does have to do with things, it is pretty clear, they chose to do.
If it does have anything to do with them, it would be to maybe give them some time to reflect on the thoughts of others in society, if the others in society agreed they should have done things differently.
So again, especially after the inspiring comment from Olbermann, I wanted to say its best to love Cheney Bush and Rove, even while making an argument that it is for the best for accountability to be held for actions, to reestablish law, and set a standard for actions. And weather people disagree with me or not, I think all would agree, there is some parts of those people that are good, even though we have heard and seen bad things come from some of their actions.
|
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
