The point of view adopted is that of a reasonably educated, peacefully brought up, sane, usually well-disposed to the rest of humanity, European person.
Sources of information are: the reasonable education (perhaps that is a prism through which to look), the Library, the internet, fellow travellers (boom, boom) and any other materials suggested that are useful.
Not a lot of econometric or statistical detail will be offered; certainly it can be obtained but it will hold things up. Those who feel that evidence can be offered that refutes a stance, offer it. Silence is assent.
Argument, not evidence, rules.
Incomprehension should be resolved with queries, which are, in themselves, helpful in gripping what is being talked about.
No laughing.
7 comments:
You said we could just start by inputting relevant information. It should all come together eventually. Here goes:
95 Labour rebels is not enough.
There should have been more voting against nuclear weapon proliferation; it was unnerving to see so few from all parts of the Commons opposing the maintenance and updating of the weaponry to maintain a divided world.
And this in the face of the Non Proliferation Treaty ; while it was particularly revealing that the actual motion pretended to support its aims.
Without a firm commitment to internationalism, to planet -wide systems of aims and actions, then aggression and defence against agression will consume both moral and real resources.
it's also widely acknowledged that no one knows how the idea of deterrence is supposed to work in the new world order.
I never bought the argument in the first place as I think it would be morally unacceptable to kill millions of people indiscriminately even if you had been attacked first. But what about a situation where a group or country doesn't care about being destroyed as long as it gets to hit its target first? Deterrence won't help you there. Mutually assured destruction is factored into the equation.
What are the nuclearists going to say then, that preventative strikes are the only way forward? Wouldn't be surprised, and that way MADness lies.
A nation-sized suicide bomber wipes out deterring arguments; no fear of consequences is a hard lesson but easy to teach.
If no-one has anything to say in support of planetary division then the next post will be on what kind of one -planet is best.
(Moving right along here).
Lenna, you are right to bring up pre-emptive strike; that needs thought first.
Post a Comment