Pointed and thoughtful as always good sir. I’m curious what might be the subsequent process of thought for average citizens like me and you if the strategy weren’t, in fact, defensible. There’s a lot of talk about what SHOULD be done in response to one of the most complex civilian, military, and ethical quandaries in modern history, but …
Pointed and thoughtful as always good sir. I’m curious what might be the subsequent process of thought for average citizens like me and you if the strategy weren’t, in fact, defensible. There’s a lot of talk about what SHOULD be done in response to one of the most complex civilian, military, and ethical quandaries in modern history, but what really happens once we decide the American (i.e Israeli) policy is no longer defensible? What does that even mean for people like you and me? Does it mean writing essays extolling the virtues of a better way? Such is the conundrum of the liberal mindset: we have plenty of well-intentioned ideas about what or what not to do, but such a moralistic stance, paradoxically, becomes as much of an ethical straight jacket as many of the politics of power you mentioned.
Hope you enjoyed the whisky! That's definitely a really hard question. The US went through it during Vietnam and it really did tear the society apart - a war that was proven to be indefensible and that in deep ways (for many Americans) delegitimized the American project altogether. The scale isn't really comparable, but Israel does seem to be pushing up against that.
The truth is that I don't think there's a good answer. During Vietnam, Americans protested or became conscientious objectors or left the country. All of these kinds of things end up on the conscience of individuals. This is one of the hardest questions there is - what is the moral responsibility of an individual citizen when they disagree profoundly with the conduct of their society.
Again, I don't actually think we're quite here, but getting there.
Pointed and thoughtful as always good sir. I’m curious what might be the subsequent process of thought for average citizens like me and you if the strategy weren’t, in fact, defensible. There’s a lot of talk about what SHOULD be done in response to one of the most complex civilian, military, and ethical quandaries in modern history, but what really happens once we decide the American (i.e Israeli) policy is no longer defensible? What does that even mean for people like you and me? Does it mean writing essays extolling the virtues of a better way? Such is the conundrum of the liberal mindset: we have plenty of well-intentioned ideas about what or what not to do, but such a moralistic stance, paradoxically, becomes as much of an ethical straight jacket as many of the politics of power you mentioned.
I need a whiskey.
Hey Samuel,
Hope you enjoyed the whisky! That's definitely a really hard question. The US went through it during Vietnam and it really did tear the society apart - a war that was proven to be indefensible and that in deep ways (for many Americans) delegitimized the American project altogether. The scale isn't really comparable, but Israel does seem to be pushing up against that.
The truth is that I don't think there's a good answer. During Vietnam, Americans protested or became conscientious objectors or left the country. All of these kinds of things end up on the conscience of individuals. This is one of the hardest questions there is - what is the moral responsibility of an individual citizen when they disagree profoundly with the conduct of their society.
Again, I don't actually think we're quite here, but getting there.
-Sam