SI
SI
discoversearch

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 : A Neutral Corner -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: Constant Reader who wrote (49)9/11/2005 11:40:00 AM
From: Rambi  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 2253
 
Considering the immediate political posturing (on all sides)

Dan and I were having a discussion on this yesterday-- when does constructive analysis become obstructive fingerpointing and scapegoating(and can that work in reverse?) and why this uncontrollable desire to use the emerging problems for political agenda. While I understand that finding the cause of the breakdowns is important, imo, rushing to blame someone before the facts are fully established seems unwise since it can as easily lead away from answers as to them.

Dan happens to be reading a book(The Fall of France) and came across this paragraph that seems to indicate the blame game is hardly new. He gave it to me last night because it reminded him of our talk and I thought it was interesting, if only because it reminds us of just how human nature doesn't really change very much.

Following the rapid and total collapse of France to the Germans, the search for scapegoats began at once.

The immediate aftermath of defeat saw the emergence of a whole literature of accusation and self-flagellation with titles such as "The Gravediggers of France"..."J'accuse! THe Men Who Betrayed France" ....One book, published in 1941 was even entitled "Has God Punished France?" (the answer was yes). Depending on ideological preference, people blamed politicians or generals, Communist agitators, or Fascist fifth columnists, schoolteachers or industrialists, the middle classes or the working classes. They blamed individualism, materialism, feminism, alcoholism, dénatalité, dechristianization, the breakup of the family, the decline of patriotism, treason, Malthusianism, immoral literature.

I imagine we could make a similar list already for NOLA that covers, political parties, global warming, lack of funding, racism, poverty....
had to look up Malthusianism, but sure, why not.



To: Constant Reader who wrote (49)9/11/2005 12:34:24 PM
From: Lane3  Respond to of 2253
 
Who would define "reliable?" What is a critical mass of calls for assistance?

I was thinking that the feds would and the criteria would not be firm. Basically, if the feds believed it was necessary, then any calls would be "reliable" and "critical mass" and if not, then none would. It's really just a way to justify stepping in while maintaining a semblance of federalism.