Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Sharks in the Septic Tank -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Lane3 who wrote (30331)	9/30/2001 11:34:17 AM
From: epicure	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 82486

"As for your expanding on your original point with notions like "universal truths," "mere ideological construct," and "imperialist," it seems to me that you're going out of your way to look for differences where none need exist. One can, for example, recognize our culture as imperialist, which it so obviously is, without any suggestion that Islamic culture might be superior. Our culture is sweeping the world because it is successful and it is so successful because, at this time in history, at least, it is superior. That doesn't mean that there are no inherent negatives in our culture. And it sure doesn't mean that our culture necessarily "embodies universal truths." It's superior because it works better than any other. IMO, it works because it best channels human nature in a productive direction. (Of course, others might have other definitions for success <g>.)" Successfulness and superiority do not necessarily meant the same thing. The WTC terrorists were "successful", are they superior? What do you mean by "successful"- do you simply mean "bulk"- because that seems to be how you are using the term. Something that "sweeps" the world is successful. Well, it is successful at sweeping the world, but is that success? It certainly isn't the only way to define success, as you mention. And superiority? Superiority is the success of sweeping? It could be defined in many other ways. And is. And has been.

To: Lane3 who wrote (30331)	10/1/2001 9:32:25 AM
From: Tom Clarke	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 82486

We still aren't in agreement that Western culture is superior to Islamic culture. In fact, we're still insisting its all the same. The Washington Post felt it necessary to rebuke Berlusconi for his remarks. Its disgraceful that the only Western leader who speaks the truth about this is condemned by his peers and the press. Italy Humiliated Monday, October 1, 2001; Page A20 ITALIAN PRIME Minister Silvio Berlusconi humiliated his nation last week with his deeply dangerous rantings about Islam. "We must be aware of the superiority of our civilization, a system that has guaranteed well-being, respect for human rights and -- in contrast with Islamic countries -- respect for religious and political rights, a system that has as its values understandings of diversity and tolerance," he told a press conference. The West, he added, "will continue to conquer peoples, like it conquered Communism," even if that means confronting "another civilization, the Islamic one, stuck where it was 1,400 years ago." Particularly in a climate in which reprisal attacks against Arabs and Muslims -- and people taken for Arabs and Muslims -- are disgustingly common, such remarks are simply unacceptable. All the more so from a head of government of a major American ally. Western leaders have, since the Sept. 11 attacks, bent over backward to distinguish the struggle against terrorism from a fight against Muslims or Islam more generally. This distinction, for which Mr. Berlusconi apparently has no patience, is critical -- and not just because any anti-terror coalition needs the cooperation of many Islamic countries to succeed. The notion that Islam sanctions mass murder is a slander, one that transforms a battle between humanity and terror into an existential confrontation that nobody can afford or should desire. The growing global alliance has no quarrel with Islam. It has a fight only with those, of whatever religious persuasion, who take up arms against civilians. To lose sight of that distinction is to accept Osama bin Laden's invitation to jihad. Days later, Mr. Berlusconi apologized -- sort of -- saying he was sorry if his comments had hurt Arabs or Muslims. His words, he said, had been "taken out of context." On that point, at least, he's right. They are from a different century. © 2001 The Washington Post Company washingtonpost.com