From: Samantha Atkins (samantha@objectent.com)
Date: Mon Feb 17 2003 - 16:07:32 MST
Brett Paatsch wrote:
> So long as others retain the choice to regard us as their
> prey war is here to stay.
So long as we treat others as our prey and their resources as
ours to command, war is here to stay.
> Unlike the decision to cooperate
> the decision to predate can be made unilaterally and that
> decision once made by one constrains the freedoms of the
> other.
>
We have annouced that we will unilaterally and preemptively
attack anything anywhere we consider a threat. Not exactly
cooperation, is it.
> And so long as the pursuit of predation *is* a unilateral choice
> (apparently forever), individuals and groups have no practical
> choice between peace and war they have only the practical
> choice between retaining a capacity for war and a willingness
> to use it or the choice of accepting the role of prey.
Yet we prohibit others from the capacity for self-defense and
propose their invasion if we do not believe the capacity is
removed. The choice is not only between war and destruction.
It almost never is. It certainly is not so when no nation or
group is really at war with you or really capable and likely to
do more than an occassional act of terrorism at most. Under
those circumstances to say that we must be at WAR and even give
up freedom for it is sheer irresponsible madness and has nothing
to do with rationality or with being a free people.
>
> Peace is not slavery or acquiescence to the role of prey and it
> does not come freely or naturally. Peace is a consequence of
> retaining a capacity for war and of the other knowing that you
> retain it.
>
No. Peace is the result of a deep appreciation for and
cultivation of peace wherever possible. War != Peace. But the
bloodthirsty and the bullies of the world will ever attempt to
insist that it does.
- samantha
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Mon Feb 17 2003 - 16:04:26 MST