"One man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter".
So says Helen Thomas, journalist. This actually is true. But, whose position should matter the most?
The other phrase often heard is "might makes right". So, a strong country determines that a freedom fighter who is attacking it is a terrorist. Is there anything wrong with that?
Actually, no.
If one reviews history, the strongest countries have in general moved us closer towards the ideals of civilization: freedom, principled lives, and practical existence. They have moved us towards the goals of knowledge, peace, love, happiness, prosperity, a feeling of meaning and contribution to the world, and freedom from suffering. None has taken us all the way there, but we move closer and closer. Ideas that move us closer may need to be fought for, and countries may move in a zigzag towards the final destination. The mark of a country's rightness is its strength to oppose those who would destroy it by words or deeds. A country that stoops to moral equivalency or moral relativism is losing its direction. It no longer has the conviction to stand up for what it believes. With the loss of belief in rightness will come a loss of power: intellectual, economic, and eventually military.
It is clearly time to decide if our country's precepts are correct or just relatively OK. Should there be the opportunity to fail? Should wrong be based on law or on individual psychology? Should success be allowed? Can the government give happiness?
DocBrain believes that the strengths of a country are in its mission statement and laws. A country that guarantees that it will not take life, liberty or property, that assures freedom, that works to the common good (ie, maintaining courts, highways, and the like), will attract individuals who want to succeed. Failure is not a virtue, nor is success a vice.
The other phrase often heard is "might makes right". So, a strong country determines that a freedom fighter who is attacking it is a terrorist. Is there anything wrong with that?
Actually, no.
If one reviews history, the strongest countries have in general moved us closer towards the ideals of civilization: freedom, principled lives, and practical existence. They have moved us towards the goals of knowledge, peace, love, happiness, prosperity, a feeling of meaning and contribution to the world, and freedom from suffering. None has taken us all the way there, but we move closer and closer. Ideas that move us closer may need to be fought for, and countries may move in a zigzag towards the final destination. The mark of a country's rightness is its strength to oppose those who would destroy it by words or deeds. A country that stoops to moral equivalency or moral relativism is losing its direction. It no longer has the conviction to stand up for what it believes. With the loss of belief in rightness will come a loss of power: intellectual, economic, and eventually military.
It is clearly time to decide if our country's precepts are correct or just relatively OK. Should there be the opportunity to fail? Should wrong be based on law or on individual psychology? Should success be allowed? Can the government give happiness?
DocBrain believes that the strengths of a country are in its mission statement and laws. A country that guarantees that it will not take life, liberty or property, that assures freedom, that works to the common good (ie, maintaining courts, highways, and the like), will attract individuals who want to succeed. Failure is not a virtue, nor is success a vice.
posted by DocBrain at
6:38 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home