Quote:
Originally Posted by Norrin Radd
That is a horrible analogy.
If you murder someone? You are not the same as a government, made of of citizens, with a military, made up of citizens, who get their funding, from citizens.
|
Ok, i thought the analogy was appropriate, but not really the issue here. Are you willing to consider the variety of ways in which governments acquire their human resources for the army, or their funds from the public? Its almost as if you are assuming that the citizenry is always complicit in these matters and can choose its course of action. Your answer is, i am assuming, well if all the citizens banded together, they could have their way. But that may not represent a strong consideration of reality. It is dreamy to assume that millions of citizens can all of sudden get on the same page and take a course of collective action. Its questionable if the chaotic elements of human nature and the limits of our species even allow such a thing to happen.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Norrin Radd
If the German people would have refused to fight for Hitler, there never would have been a WWII, or a holocaust.
|
And you have studied the ratio between draftees and volunteers in this situation? Even if we consider that those who fought are guilty, what about all the citizens who were not asked to fight and did not fight?
If hitler had not made himself furher and decided for himself to take his state along that path, it would not have happened either!
Is it not more appropriate to focus on who designed the atrocities than those who may have been indirectly or unconsciously involved?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Norrin Radd
All they had to do is say NO, I will not fight for you. Sure, many would have been killed, but how many Germans died during WWII anyways?
|
You are being way to simplistic, ignoring realities of human nature, and ignoring the paranoid environment of the interwar era.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Norrin Radd
If the people share no responsibility, then a government can do anything it wants and the people are blameless?
|
Those who do the bad things are to blame. Not those stuck on the sidelines with no choice in the matter.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Norrin Radd
Believe me, I do see your point. In places like Saudi Arabia, where there are no civil rights, no freedom of speech, or the press, it would be very difficult to do anything to try to change the government. In tyrannical regimes, I place LESS blame on the people, but there is still blame. In a country like America, where we do have freedom of speech and alleged freedom of the press, we have more responsibility.
|
Good points.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Norrin Radd
Do you really believe that the people of the USA are totally blameless for the actions of our government?
|
No i do not. However, you are exxagerating the extent to which the american people have control over their government, which believe me, is not absolute.
I place blame with the people who do the act in question. That is physically do, or use their power to issue orders to get it done.
Just because a people are caught up in the same ploitical boundary as these folks it does not follow that their complicity can be assumed to have existed. I did not get to design the american system of government, so therefore i will refuse to be held accountable for the system's actions. Only those who praise the system and support the decisions in question can be held collectively accountable for the decisions in question.