sarcasm is the lowest form of wit
Hitler - again, you look at history through rose-tinted bourgeois
You don't make historical, objective points, but subjective, emotional ones.
You want to make people sentimentalise about events. I mean, you can't
possibly say that, can you, what about the N****. Please, no sentiment,
no phoney bourgeois 'legalism', I don't need it.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Anthony Crifasi" <crifasi@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Saturday, March 22, 2003 10:17 PM
Subject: Re: ontical history
> Paul Murphy wrote:
> >do you really think it is surprising that a Soviet appeared in Muenchen?
> >You seem to depict that city as a bastion of reaction. In fact, many
> >artists and intellectuals were attracted to the city, thus giving the
> >an intriguing basis.
> >The causes of WW1 was a general collpase of diplomacy and the checks and
> >balances that held up the status quo. The status quo was undermined by
> >Germany's aggressive desire for an overseas empire, a place in the sun.
> >all the other W European countries had expanded globally, Germany's
> >insistence flew in the face of British interests, as did the arms race
> >preceded the war. I don't think we can attribute guilt. Everyone was
> >guilty, in fact the notion of guilt, a legalistic term, I believe to be
> >irrelevant, or of marginal relevance (and this applies to recent events
> Do you think that Hitler's guilt for the deliberate deaths of millions of
> Jews is merely ... "legalistic"?
> >The system that had been in place collapsed, because it was only a
> >temporary solution. Cut and paste solutions, such as Israel and Ulster -
> >essence, ahistorical states, and Yugoslavia can be named as another one,
> >remember Gavrio Princip, the member of the Black Hand terrorist
> >that assassinated Archduke Ferdinand and his wife, was Serbian, and thus
> >another terrorist from one of these marginal 'ahistorical' states - hold
> >uneasy truce, but are never permanent solutions. They were never meant
> >be. All the purported 'solutions' to the problems in these regions, were
> >later exposed to be as phoney as the brokers who 'solved' them. If
> >diplomacy has broken down again, it is because the uneasy truce
> >in these ahistorical states has once again broken down, and this break
> >as profound as anoraexia or a psychotic episode, threatens the hegemony
> >the main powers, or of the superpower. The schizophrenic relationship of
> >the Imperialist to the Colonised, a relationship of inverted, unreal
> >'dependency', has to be addressed, and cured, but not in the sense that
> >physical or mental illness is 'cured', ie with drug therapy, the stages
> >recovery, the final cure. No, in reality the Imperialist and the
> >have formed a symbiosis, one with the other, an inverted dependency,
> >algebraic equation, and deeply, intrinsically suicidal for both parties.
> >The illness, because that is a better term than 'guilt' which establishes
> >clear dichotomy, guilt/innocence hence leaving no middle ground, of
> >because the middle ground is where most life is - and its deepest
> >presumptions and assumptions, have to be questioned at an absolute level,
> >and then ameliorated by tactics of disguise, flight and, possible
> >labyrinthine strategems, on the part of the colonised, to displace and
> >ridicule the Imperialist, not perhaps by crashing jets into tall
> >a possibly understandable act in regard to other events both nihilistic
> >barbaric, only leading to another uneasy cut and paste solution.
> "Barbaric"? Getting dangerously close to assigning "guilt" there, Paul.
> Wouldn't want to be just "legalistic" here, would we?
> Anthony Crifasi
> The new MSN 8: smart spam protection and 2 months FREE*
> --- from list heidegger@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx ---
--- from list heidegger@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx ---