Anti-americans everywhere

[calbert at hslboxmaster.com]

 Murthy:

> Not either/or, but probably both.  When the "warriors" carry out their
> deeds in the name of their weaker, downtrodden brotheren, the fact
> that they themselves are not downtrodden doesn't detract from the
> ardor, but only makes it seem imperative that they, who can, act on
> behalf of those who can't. And the ideology provides a vision for the
> ideal world where there are no downtrodden.

"I knew two or three Robespierres personally; they always wore 
clean shirts, washed their hands and cleaned their nails."

A. Herzen.

A readiness to do so may stem from a number of different and in 
some cases unrelated reasons, or even pathologies. I see most as 
different in degree but not in kind from those of born of privilege who 
exhort the poor to "pull themselves up by their bootstraps". Each 
case is grounded in a naive assumption regarding the origins and 
causes of poverty. They do not lie exclusively in the treatment of 
man towards his fellow man, nor in flaws of character - but rather, 
involve a complex set of circumstances and apparent demographic 
"laws", neither of which lend themselves to easy 
solutions......Ossama's 300 mill could surely be put to better and 
more immediate use.

> Even though the attacks were made in the name of ideology and on
> behalf of the politically repressed, poverty is important in providing
> the ideological warriors with a broad base of sympathy if not support.

Yes, but our response must involve an effort to separate the facts 
and fictions of such ideologies. Solutions founded on weak but 
comforting premises will offer no solutions in the long term.

love,
cfa
 
> Murthy
> 
> -- 
> Murthy Yenamandra                  mailto:yenamand at cs.umn.edu
> "I strive to be brief, but I become obscure." - Horace
>