posted
I could go dig up research as well, but I'm way too tired. Suffice it to say, I think you're mixing up cause and effect. The Japanese became racist against the West because the West was racist towards them. The rest of what you say is perfectly valid.
I suppose you believe Hollywood propaganda that the Indians were the aggressers against the United States and Europeans in North America as well right?
------------------ 1957: The space age begins when the first artificial satellite, Sputnik 1, is placed in orbit by the Soviet Union on October 4. Our German rocket scientists get very annoyed with their German rocket scientists. � Outpost
[This message has been edited by Mucus (edited July 17, 2000).]
------------------ "To disarm the people [is] the best and most effectual way to enslave them." - George Mason, American Statesman and Author of the Virginia Declaration of Rights (1776)
posted
And yet ironically characters in their cartoons have features that Japanese people don't have. Like ginger hair.
And blue hair.
------------------ "I can't believe we're actually gonna meet Guru Lou. Everyone says he's the wisest man in the universe. He's sensitive, creative, has a great sense of humour, and he's a really smooth dancer. *giggles*" "You're confused Polly. We're not meeting Paul Newman." - Polly & Speedy; Samurai Pizza Cats
posted
Yeah. I saw a video that tried to explain that, a while back. I'll have to re-watch it and let you know.
My "History of East Asia" college course taught that each (Japanese and Chinese) culture thought itself superior to all others, (as did white western culture), and that bits of that feeling persist to this day (as it does in places in white cultures). This led to conflict, but was not in and of itself a primary cause. However, it was partly Japan's version of "Manifest Destiny" that led them to seek control of the Pacific Rim.
------------------ "Nobody knows this, but I'm scared all the time... of what I might do, if I ever let go." -- Michael Garibaldi
posted
Yes, but both the political and economical reasons had a lot to do with slavery. The South's economy was dependent upon slavery, and they didn't want to give that up. The Politics of State's Rights vs. Federal control was also at issue, regarding whether the federal government could set limits on, or abolish, slavery.
------------------ "Nobody knows this, but I'm scared all the time... of what I might do, if I ever let go." -- Michael Garibaldi
posted
*shrug* Omega: name a country in this world which hasn't "murdered" peaceful protestors. Morality is merely a matter of perspective.
Lesse, the Roman empire slaughtered christians, American's slaughtered Indians, same with Canada to a lesser degree, Spain had its Great Inqusition, China had Tianammen Square, England had *deep breath* Scotland, Ireland, various Protestant vs. Catholic clashes....need I go on?
By your definition, there isn't a single civilization in the world. Except maybe the really small ones in the Pacific rim
------------------ 1957: The space age begins when the first artificial satellite, Sputnik 1, is placed in orbit by the Soviet Union on October 4. Our German rocket scientists get very annoyed with their German rocket scientists. � Outpost
[This message has been edited by Mucus (edited July 18, 2000).]
In the first half of the century the Cuban economy was pretty much controlled by the USA. The money & wealth generated went back to the USA. The Cubans, being a tad peeved by this, had a revolution. Castro booted out US companies. This peeved the USA off. And they went about systematically destroying Cubas reputation for the next 40 odd years. ---- Some interesting things the CIA did to try and stop Castro:
When Castro came to the USA the US President refused to meet him.
The CIA systematically torched Cuban factories and farms. One document method was to cover a cat in petrol, light it, and then run it through a field of grain. Thus burning the crop. Lovely.
The CIA also tried to have Castro assasinated, and attempted poison. Look up operation mongoose, all ye chest thumping yankees. Also, pick up a book by Noam Chompsky. The guy is utterly brilliant. It'll be a real educational experience. ---- When the Cubans attempted to gain nuclear weapons as a deterrent to US aggression, you chaps went mental. Typical. Nobody DARE defend themselves. Those bastards!
Now, after all this, the USA implemeted the Helms-Burton law. Stating the no company that traded in Cuba could trade in the USA. A brilliant plan. No doubt. The USA could then claim that they were not blocking trade with Cuba. And thus blame any economic problems the Cubans had on Castro. The reality is quite different. (Just in case you didn't get the hint *L*).
The Helms-Burton law DOES effectively stop other nations dealing with Cuba by using the simplest economic rule. Risk v. Return. If a company trades with the Cubans, they are exiled from the 270 million strong US market. The number 1 market in the world. Who in their right mind would choose to trade with a few million cubans, who have relatively little wealth? Nobody. Thus effectively stopping international trade with Cuba. Excellent, well done. Well done, Senator Jessie 'the bastard'(as we affectionately call him) Helms. So what is this about? It's about money. As it always was with the USA. If you can't have it, nobody can.
A small nation dared to stand up for itself, and what an example the mighty made of it. Be proud, very proud, of what you have achieved.
When attacking Cuba, people will cry: 'But look, Castro's a DEMON' and 'they sponsor terrorism'. Lets see. In the last decade, over 1 million children under the age of 5 have died in Iraq, due to American sanctions. God, George Must be proud. Look what daddy did. The USA sponsors far more political campaigns than any other nation. Hell, in 1975 they even had the Aussie PM removed. And lets not forget, with such reliable sources as CNN and the NY times reporting on Castro, everything they say must be true. Afterall, its not like the NY Times is owned by the largest supplier of weapons to the US govt or anything.
A couple of other 'minor' points, the sanctions are illegal as they have not been written and ratified by the UN. But hey, why would you care about that?
Does the US govt know why other nations such as China and India are reluctant to fully open themselves (and their gigantic markets) to you? Because, quite frankly, you can't be trusted. Cuba is a glaring example of this. If anyone dares to speak out, they're screwed. Just like Cuba.
Capitalism by nature is a predator. And the USA is the supreme capitalist. It's always about money, and thus power. That's the American way. The USA is at the top of the food chain. That's why the USA (5% of the worlds population), controls about 43% of the resources. (Yeah, obscene aint it!). So as you can see, this system of resource allocation isn't a merticoracy, its Darwinism at its peak.
So why can't you let the Cubans have their country back and live in peace? It's kinda hurtful to the ego maybe? Yeah...can't leave a little nation alone, to fend for themsevles. Nope. As one American politician stated 'Just give me the signal, and I'll turn that little island into a fucking parking lot'. Beautiful. It you can't have it, crush it.
The American way.
Get the hell off their island.
------------------ "More beer, more beer, more beer, more beer! ARSE!" - Ode to God.
[This message has been edited by Daryus Aden (edited July 19, 2000).]
quote: Yes, but both the political and economical reasons had a lot to do with slavery. The South's economy was dependent upon slavery, and they didn't want to give that up. The Politics of State's Rights vs. Federal control was also at issue, regarding whether the federal government could set limits on, or abolish, slavery.
Glad there is someone else around who sees this. We had this out at the BBS, back around flag day. I could have used you there First. You are far better at argueing then I am.
------------------ Fool of a Took, throw yourself in next time!! Gandalf
OK, ours. There's a big difference between a soldier getting jumpy or getting rocks thrown at him or whatever and opening fire, and soldiers actually having ORDERS to kill the protesters. Oh, and morality is not relative.
------------------ "To disarm the people [is] the best and most effectual way to enslave them." - George Mason, American Statesman and Author of the Virginia Declaration of Rights (1776)
relative Function: adjective Date: 15th century : not absolute or independent
Main Entry: ab�so�lute Function: adjective Date: 14th century : having no restriction, exception, or qualification, independent of arbitrary standards of measurement
Great, Einstein raised doubt whether or not most of our basic measurements of time and space are relative and you're trying to say a human abstraction like morality is absolute?
Gee, is it moral to kill? The United States say yes (capital punishment), other nations say no (Canada). Is abortion moral? Don't even have to bother explaining that one. Is it moral to for a millionaire to steal bread? Is it moral for a starving child to steal food?
How the hell can you say that Western morals are absolute with no element of relativity?
On a more superficical level, I said its a matter of perspective.
For your second part. How the f*** can you be so egocentric (culture-centric?) to even start to believe that North America is the only "civilization" in the world. You're wrong with the superficial definition of the word. You're wrong with the connotations of that word. And you're trying to say your standard of morality is the only applicable one in the whole world? Can you be any more arrogant?
Third part: Oh thats right. The Western world has never issued orders to kill civilians. Hiroshima, various sites of the Holocaust, Germans bombing London, Americans killing civilians in Vietnam. They all never existed.
Oh, wanna get more specific? Countries in the Western world have never killed their own citizens. Capital punishment, various flavours of eugenics, the Great Inqusition, Waco Texas, they all never existed.
I'm not saying that the rest of the world is perfect. In fact, far from it. Just don't be so arrogant to assume your little slice of the world is perfect and judge the rest of the world accordingly.
First of Two: The difference between history and current events is relative. See above elaboration.
------------------ 1957: The space age begins when the first artificial satellite, Sputnik 1, is placed in orbit by the Soviet Union on October 4. Our German rocket scientists get very annoyed with their German rocket scientists. � Outpost
Printer-friendly view of this topic
