From: Robert J. Bradbury (bradbury@aeiveos.com)
Date: Sat Jan 25 2003 - 16:31:55 MST
On Sat, 25 Jan 2003 Spudboy100@aol.com wrote:
> The thing to think about, I suggest, is that even those places which may have
> lost a hundred ciitzens, it is treated as "America's problem."
I don't think, given the what I saw of the actions of a very large
number of British citizens in the wake of 911 that *they* viewed it
as an "American problem". Nor do I think given the recent events in
Bali that the Australians view it as an "American problem". Nor do
I suspect that the Philippine, Japanese or South Korean governments
view it as an "American problem".
> I would argue that most of the world, including the present administarion,
> has been "soft on wahabbism", to parapharse Dicky Nixon.
Let us try to be extropic here -- let is take it out of a purely religious
context. As have said in previous messages the problem is "intolerance".
The average American anti-abortionist doesn't know squat about "wahabbism"
but they are card carrying experts in "intolerance".
> If one cannot address Islamic Militancy, as a prime threat, then the
> problem may indeed worsen. Right now W Bushes comming invasion of
> Iraq seems the only game in town, because frankly, nobody else is leading.
If you think Islamic Militancy is the primary problem we face then your
compass has a magnet on the bottom. No doubt it is certainly a major problem,
but I'd put aging, AIDS, water resources, esp. in the mideast, and several
other topics that I have mentioned in other posts as being equal to this
problem or even more important.
I am going to go against my normal perspective/framework of considering
the deaths of 911 unconsionable, unjustifiable and morally outrageous.
For heaven's sake people we have 40+ million deaths a year from aging,
probably 10+ million deaths from various infectious diseases and/or
starvation, a probable death toll from AIDS anywhere in the 50-100 million
range (far exceeding the 1918 Influenza pandemic death toll and probably
coming close to the combined death toll of the bubonic plague in the
6th, 14th and 17th centuries) -- and you are complaining and going
on and on and on about how we must seek revenge about ~3000 lives
lost in the 911 events? Give me a break.
I feel it as much or more than each of you because I know (in my heart)
that those lives lost might have lived hundreds or even thousands of years.
But *put* it into perspective. The "Rational Thinking" Extropian Principle
requires that you do this.
> For example, both France and Russia are courting Iraq and the Arab world,
> while bemoaning Islamist attacks on their homelands. Surely, this hypocrisy
> should not stand. They think that they can dance at two weddings at the same
> time, but they can't.
Sure they can. There are different brides and grooms involved. I have
no doubt that various countries can manage to say one thing when
multi-million dollar contracts are involved and something completely
different when courting popular opinion when trying to get reelected.
The multi-million dollar contracts speak *much* louder than the
(possible -- since this is still very questionable) efforts of
a few militants to kill a few hundred citizens. You only have to
look at Russia and Chechnya over the last 3-5 years to understand this.
> So who is to avenge those slain on 9-11, and prevent future murderers from
> having their way? Little old us, the US. Arrogantly put, but whom are we
> going to depend on for help, the Mongolians?
I know this -- that it seems very unlikely that the Mongolians are going
to help us with aging, hunger/starvation (in fact they are starving
themselves this winter), AIDS or many of the other problems we as
extropians face long before one deals with the loss of 3000 lives
in downtown Manhattan.
I lived in Manhattan -- I rode in the WTC elevators and once had dinner
at "Windows on the World". I strongly doubt there are many people on the
list that have a stronger experiential connection to the events of 911
(its always possible that there are a few) than I. Every day that
something about 911 comes up I have to experience the feelings that it
*isn't* f***ing there any more and I have to think about how many people
suffered and died in that event.
And I have to balance those thoughts and feelings (which include a
relatively heartfelt experiential loss) with my more abstract knowledge
of aging, starvation, infectious diseases, military tyrants, etc. And
I have to see if I can manage to see how to wrestle with them all.
Wrestling with only one risk to humanity, i.e. wahabbism, seems to
fail the "rational thinking" test. You have to be able to stack
up the wahabbism risk with the asteroid risk with the gamma ray
burst risk with the breakout of an amoral AI in the Kazaa network risk.
You (we?) have to figure out ways to have some confidence that someone
somewhere is "on top of" that risk -- and then we need to learn to
be comfortable that we have good, talented, responsible people on
top of said risk and trust they are going to do the best job they
can do. If we cannot do that then I'd better go start riding
Roller Coasters in an attempt to increase my fun quotient before
my hazard function hits the wall (i.e. maximize my potential for
some fun before the dust catches up with me).
Robert
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sun Feb 02 2003 - 21:26:03 MST