[lkml]   [2001]   [Oct]   [22]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: Linux 2.2.20pre10
On Mon, Oct 22, 2001 at 06:01:02PM -0700, Jeff Golds wrote:
> > > >> > > "Until they become conscious they will never rebel, and until after
> > > >> > > they have rebelled they cannot become conscious."
> > > >> >
> > > >> > While I've been generally saddened by Alan Cox's and others
> > > >> > anti-America attitude, I am somewhat surprised to find that
> > > >> > Alan believes the US bombing of Afghanistan is justified and so
> > > >> > is the collateral damage as they call it.
> > > >>
> > > >> That quote is rather older than the US bombing of Afghanistan. You read
> > > >> totally inappropriate things into it.
> > > >
> > > >Certainly, it is not. This statement applies to Afghanistan, in that
> > > >the fact that they have not rebelled means they imply consent to
> > > >everything their government does, and therefore are just as guilty as
> > > >the Taliban. Therefore, killing civilians (collateral damage) is no
> > > >worse than killing terrorists or Taliban officials. This is a stance I
> > > >can easily subscribe to, not just with Afghanistan but with any people,
> > > >nation, state, or country.
> > >
> > > That seems like a willful misreading of the original. Where did you
> > > get "consent"? Alan suggests that non-rebellion implies lack of
> > > consciousness, which doesn't imply consent.
> >
> > Seems like, but isn't. It's every citizen's responsibility to be aware
> > of the matters concerning the State. If they aren't, then again it is
> > their own fault.
> That might be true in a democracy, but what do you do when you don't
> live in such a place? What if your government was not democractic but
> "whoever has the most guns". Are you saying that people who don't rebel
> against people with guns are consenting?

Of course. It's naturally understandable that they don't rebel, but
that's the case, at least. Democratic society did not spring overnight.
It was hard won through centuries of standing up against 'the people
with guns,' even if the people with guns had swords, bows and arrows,
cannons, rifles, etc., instead.

> Also, how can "every citizen be aware of the matters concerning the
> State" when you live in a society where the State controls the media?

Again, see above. Others have managed it. No one is saying its easy,
only possible.

And again, I don't hold the fact that the unarmed Afghans don't rebel
against them. As I said it's completely understandable. I don't think
they deserve to be killed. I'm only saying that a good argument can be
made that they are completely responsible for their government, directly
or indirectly.
In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act.
-- George Orwell
Freedom is slavery. Ignorance is strength. War is peace.
-- George Orwell
Those that would give up a necessary freedom for temporary safety
deserver neither freedom nor safety.
-- Ben Franklin
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:10    [W:0.518 / U:40.684 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site