Morality and Philosphy

The Cold War has been over, or so we’re told, for over a dozen years now. Why then is it that our political discourse sometimes still sounds like Marx vs. Gladstone? Eric S. Raymond examines the history of ideological warfare, from its roots in the Cold War, to the modern manifestation in the seeming clash of civilizations between Islam and the West.

The essay does wax a bit … pretentious, if I may. But all the name-dropping (in terms of philosophers, writers, and memes) is exactly the sort that ivory tower types might be most excited by.

The essay also seems to adopt what Richard Hofstadter has called the “paranoid style”. Now, I’m not big on conspiracy theory or religion, which share some traits. Still, the temptation to adopt conspiracy theory is a basic human impulse, and in this vein, one could do worse than to read what Raymond has to say. You don’t have to agree with his conclusions, but what he states should be interesting, and a thought-provoking examination of the source of your beliefs.

[Cross-posted at Between Worlds]

Okay, I figure youse boyz (and girlz) know more about military history than I. (Anyone would, of course–and clearly some of you have thought much about this.)

My question: how different is the relation between our modern army and the average American than was that relationship two hundred years ago? The services have changed dramatically in terms of technology, but how has that played out in differences in the attitude of citizens, leaders, the military itself? And does modern capitalism lead us to an idolatry of the marketplace unknown in, say, 1775?

(A rambling anecdotal backstory follows.)

Read more

The problem with forgiveness for murderers is that the people who can give it are all dead. For the State or other third parties to “forgive” is an act of moral presumptuousness that implicitly denigrates the victims. The best that the State can do is to deliver retribution in the form of execution. Even better if the victims of prospective murderers fight back and are not murdered in the first place.

I have misgivings about the death penalty in practice because some innocent people are executed. However, none of these concerns apply in the Williams case, since Williams’s guilt was not seriously in doubt. Morally, execution of known murderers is the fairest and least judgmental response and the one that is most respectful of the victims.

A few years ago, a man wanted by the police in Houston ran from his house, holding his toddler as shield. As I remember, in the end he was captured; but, sure enough, no one shot at him for fear of hitting the child. He seemed at once unnatural and uncivilized. Naturally, we think, we protect our own. And civilization teaches us to protect the weak. Of course, it is also a natural desire to get out of bad situations unscathed. But he counted on others valuing the life of his child more than he did himself – that seems incredible opportunism; it relies on others’ civilized behavior leveraged by his own barbarism, others’ automatic protection of the weak while he is absorbed in the great I. Fortunately, we can count on civilization. Others would hold fire, want to rescue the child—indeed, “do the right thing.” And, I suspect, if they didn’t, they would be scorned by society. As well they should be.

Read more

If you haven’t already, please go read this piece by Peggy Noonan.

Then come back and let’s discuss it.

Are things really that bad?