My good friend Esther is running a marathon to drum up some cash for Green Scare convict Daniel McGowan. A source of information on the so-called Green Scare may be found here: http://www.eberhardtpress.org/content/greenscare.php
Either way, please visit the link below and pledge a few cents a mile or whatever you can spare for Daniel. He is not on vacation, he is doing hard time. Support that motherfucker or you're a douche.
http://bookinfordaniel.eberhardtpress.org/
Wednesday, July 11, 2007
Monday, July 9, 2007
Support the Troops
What does this mean? And why should we?
If you think the war in Iraq (abd/or the one in Afghanistan) is adventuristic, uncalled-for, needlessly brutal, immoral, unethical, unfortunate, ill-advised, fucked-up, bad news, uncool, just plain wrong, and/or sucky, why on earth would you qualify that position with the absurd (and probably meaningless) statement that you "support the troops"? That seems to be what the majority of people who oppose the war do, however; certainly it is de rigeur for a politician or public figure.
Saying you oppose the war but "support the troops" is basically saying that it is a wise, ethically justifiable, or honorable thing to consider yourself a piece of meat at the disposal of the US government, who will enforce any decision the politicians make without questioning it. This shit didn't fly at Nuremberg, so why should it fly now? If you believe that US servicepeople are responsible for their own decisions, like anyone else, and if you believe that the war in Iraq was a bad decision, then it is idiotic to say that you "support the troops."
I think a position of principled opposition to the war is incoherent unless it includes a position of explicitly NOT supporting the troops. It is true that many low-income people who feel they are without options wind up in the military. It is true that many very well-intentioned people wind up in the military. It is true that the military has a larger proportion of racial minorities than society at large, and this is probably the result of the aforementioned economic factors.
Fine. One can sympathize or even empathize with soldiers without giving them "support" qua troops, which gives them the message that you are behind them, right or wrong. It would be absurd to say "I am against rape, but I support the rapist. He is a minority and poor, and never had a proper education. That's not his fault, it's the fault of the politicians in Washington, etc. So I will not discourage him from raping you; instead, I'll write to my congressman."
This isn't to say that the primary blame for war should be directed at the soldiers; certainly, the above is an imperfect analogy. But "support the troops"?? Fuck the troops.
If you think the war in Iraq (abd/or the one in Afghanistan) is adventuristic, uncalled-for, needlessly brutal, immoral, unethical, unfortunate, ill-advised, fucked-up, bad news, uncool, just plain wrong, and/or sucky, why on earth would you qualify that position with the absurd (and probably meaningless) statement that you "support the troops"? That seems to be what the majority of people who oppose the war do, however; certainly it is de rigeur for a politician or public figure.
Saying you oppose the war but "support the troops" is basically saying that it is a wise, ethically justifiable, or honorable thing to consider yourself a piece of meat at the disposal of the US government, who will enforce any decision the politicians make without questioning it. This shit didn't fly at Nuremberg, so why should it fly now? If you believe that US servicepeople are responsible for their own decisions, like anyone else, and if you believe that the war in Iraq was a bad decision, then it is idiotic to say that you "support the troops."
I think a position of principled opposition to the war is incoherent unless it includes a position of explicitly NOT supporting the troops. It is true that many low-income people who feel they are without options wind up in the military. It is true that many very well-intentioned people wind up in the military. It is true that the military has a larger proportion of racial minorities than society at large, and this is probably the result of the aforementioned economic factors.
Fine. One can sympathize or even empathize with soldiers without giving them "support" qua troops, which gives them the message that you are behind them, right or wrong. It would be absurd to say "I am against rape, but I support the rapist. He is a minority and poor, and never had a proper education. That's not his fault, it's the fault of the politicians in Washington, etc. So I will not discourage him from raping you; instead, I'll write to my congressman."
This isn't to say that the primary blame for war should be directed at the soldiers; certainly, the above is an imperfect analogy. But "support the troops"?? Fuck the troops.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
