Dualistic Tension
There's nothing that turns me off more than ignorance masqueraded as knowledge or trivia presented as gravitas. I don't go around looking for cheap praise and facile approval as some feeble-minded individuals think I do, but I love shooting down sloppy, mushy, hazy, lazy thinking. ( I do look for real teachers and intellectual stimuli).
Righteousness has to be science and reality-based, and must not rest on wishful thinking and superstitions. One must always ask oneself if one's thinking is rationalistic and logical. Of course, the rationalism and logic of one's thinking depend on one's values. A selfish, self-absorbed person's rationalism and logic would be different from those of a caring, altruistic person. So, at the end of the day we are back to values and philosophies. Thus, we are back to the fundamental question: for what and for whom do we live? For our own selfish interests or for others and the group at large or somewhere in between?
Sociobiologists maintain that altruism is ultimately beneficial, not only to the group, but also to the individuals. Naked and rampant individualism is a harbinger of a society's collapse.
Rampant concerns with self-interests are what are happening in Vietnam, from the very top-the Politburo of the VCP, who set a very poor example for the populace, down to the bottom. There are some individual exceptions like Le Cong Dinh, Le Thi Cong Nhan, et al., who devote their lives to Vietnam.
What we need is a revolution in thinking, a step in the right direction in Vietnam, otherwise Vietnam will be a province of China in about 25-50 years, if not sooner.
We all have to die someday. On our deathbed, we must ask ourselves, not the silly concerns about reincarnation and Last Judgment, but the real question whether or not our lives have had real meaning and relevance and contribution to our group, our race, our country (could be more than one in recognition of the special situations of diasporas)
Three-Cent ThinkerWissai
P.S. This piece was written as a result of my preoccupation with the dualistic tension between altruism and selfishness, between patriotism and self-preservation. The thinking process is raw and not well- developed, yet I decided to post it in the hope of receiving some feedback. Sociobiology was invoked but I only had a vague idea about it. However, the statement regarding what we should feel when lying on our deathbed was heart-felt and probably explained of and accounted for much of my outlandish behavior.
I don't know if you guys have heard of the Khmer Kampuchea Krom movement. When I first heard about it, I felt really sad for the Khmer people. And then I felt a terror and a horror running through my body when I thought of the threat China was posing to our people. I don't want to see a Free Vietnam Movement when I am lying on my deathbed, feeling impotent and useless and full of regrets.
My job requires long drives across many states of the USA. As endless sretches of roads are ahead of me and vast vistas of landscape extend to the horizon, I cannot help thinking that only more than 150 years ago, these lands belonged to Mexico, just as barely 350 years ago, much of South Vietnam belonged to Kampuchea. While Mexico has a fighting chance to reclaim her lost lands due to population growth and a merge with the U .S. and Canada to form a superstate to fight against the dominant China, Vietnam has no chance to regain its sovereignty once it becomes a province of China.
No province of China has managed to break free from the Han rule and stay free for long, except, of course, Vietnam. We have been mostly independent since 939 C.E (Current Era, AD smacks and smells of religious bias). It looks like our days of independence from the Chinese are over if most of us embrace selfishness.
For the sake of our survival as a distinct people with a sovereign country to call our own, we need to familiarize ourselves quickly with the notion of altruism.
Wednesday, December 2, 2009
Why China's Adventurism in the East Sea has to be stopped now
It's the fault of the U.S. for not maintaining a strong presence in the East Sea after the collapse of South Vietnam which led to the increasing bellicose attitude of Red China. America's being bogged down in Iraq, Afghanistan, and maybe in Pakistan as well, in addition to its suffering from the economic crisis don't help either. America has to show Red China that its adventurism and absurd cow tongue doctrine are not acceptable otherwise China will keep on flexing its muscles to a point of no return as Japan did in the 1930's.
Wissai
Wissai
Fear
What is Fear? What are the common fears of humans? What is our biggest fear? Once we confront these questions head on with the related issues of death, pride, ego, dignity, love of our fellow country men, altruism, preservation of own group and race, patriotism, honor, and responsibility, then we would understand why some men elect to fight while others choose to grovel, why some find inspiration in Tran Hung Dao and Nguyen Thai Hoc while others imitate Tran Ich Tac and Ton Tho Tuong (T3)
Remember, we all have to die. It's not how long we live, but how we live. True pride makes fear look small. A fearful person is a small person. Somebody needs to tell Nguyen Huu Liem and his ilk that "fact".
Remember, we all have to die. It's not how long we live, but how we live. True pride makes fear look small. A fearful person is a small person. Somebody needs to tell Nguyen Huu Liem and his ilk that "fact".
Which Vietnamese Flag should be up at University of Southern California
1. Vietnamese communists were a bunch of parasites, thieves and robbers who took advantage of the patriotism of the Vietnamese in their fights against the French colonialists and later the Americans, to get themselves in positions of power. Once firmly in power, these parasites, thieves and robbers treated the populace with contempt and iron hands. The communist officials have never been truly elected by the people. They use terror and corruption to perpetuate their rule. Because of the communists, about three million Vietnamese are living in diasporas all over the world. These overseas Vietnamese do not and will not accept the rule of Communism. Their brethren in Vietnam don't accept the Communist rule either but they are muzzled and suppressed brutally, hence their dissatisfaction and protests don't receive wide coverage in international media.
2. Whenever I see the VC flag, I feel nauseous and angry because it is a symbol of tyranny and ineptitude. Most people in the world don't know the Vietnamese Communists are ceding Vietnamese land and sea to China. Many students and intellectuals rose in protests over this selling of ancestral territories. They were brutally put down and now languish in prisons. This fact needs to be brought to the attention of the world.
3. South Vietnamese flag represented a much better life when there were essential human rights and when the educational and health care systems were much sounder and free of intolerable practices such as bribing teachers and health care providers in the nominal public schools and hospitals in order to receive some teaching and medical care. So, the poor in Vietnam, and they are the majority, don't have a chance to get ahead, no matter how bright they are. Contrary to the myth of classless society, in Communist rule in Vietnam, there are three
classes: the ruling class with all the privileges, the working class who toil day and night to secure a living, and the poor who live in abject poverty with no help and attention from the government.
4. The USC should display the South Vietnam flag because it is the flag of democracy and decency. And USC should side with democracy and decency because in the end democracy and decency will triumph.
5. USC should not be known as an institution that identifies with totalitarianism, lies, and indecency.
6. Out of ignorance, USC is displaying the flag of the Communists, not knowing that it is the symbol that a great majority of the Vietnamese in the States despise and hate. Most Vietnamese students in the disapora would not attend USC if the Communist flag is displayed. These students are more numerous than the ones came from Vietnam.
7. Through dissemination of information of how the community has viewed the Viet Cong flag with hatred and revulsion.
Wissai
From: Christine Trang <ctrang@usc.edu>Subject: Co Viet Cong at USCTo: anmai39@yahoo. comDate: Sunday, November 29, 2009, 5:52 PM
Here is a list of the questions I have for you. Please feel free to write as much as you would like, in either Vietnamese or English. I am planning on starting the article Wednesday, Dec. 2, so please send me the answers by Monday, Nov. 30 or Tuesday, Dec. 1. I greatly appreciate your time and attention!1) How did the actions of Vietnamese communists affect you personally? For example, what happened to you, your family or your friends?2) What are your thoughts, feelings or emotions when you see the Vietnamese communist flag? Why do you think or feel those things?3) What does the South Vietnamese flag mean to you and the Vietnamese community?4) Why do you think USC should display the South Vietnamese flag?5) Why do you think USC should not display the Vietnamese communist flag?6) Why do you think USC chose to display the Vietnamese communist flag? Do you think there is an economic reason for that? For example, there are a lot of students who come to USC from Vietnam. Do you think USC chose to display the Vietnamese communist flag to satisfy the government in Vietnam, so that the government there will continue to send more students to USC?7) What do you think the Vietnamese community should do to convince USC to display the South Vietnamese flag?If you have any questions, please feel free to call me on my cell phone at (310) 748-2342.Cam on bac!Regards, Christine Trang
2. Whenever I see the VC flag, I feel nauseous and angry because it is a symbol of tyranny and ineptitude. Most people in the world don't know the Vietnamese Communists are ceding Vietnamese land and sea to China. Many students and intellectuals rose in protests over this selling of ancestral territories. They were brutally put down and now languish in prisons. This fact needs to be brought to the attention of the world.
3. South Vietnamese flag represented a much better life when there were essential human rights and when the educational and health care systems were much sounder and free of intolerable practices such as bribing teachers and health care providers in the nominal public schools and hospitals in order to receive some teaching and medical care. So, the poor in Vietnam, and they are the majority, don't have a chance to get ahead, no matter how bright they are. Contrary to the myth of classless society, in Communist rule in Vietnam, there are three
classes: the ruling class with all the privileges, the working class who toil day and night to secure a living, and the poor who live in abject poverty with no help and attention from the government.
4. The USC should display the South Vietnam flag because it is the flag of democracy and decency. And USC should side with democracy and decency because in the end democracy and decency will triumph.
5. USC should not be known as an institution that identifies with totalitarianism, lies, and indecency.
6. Out of ignorance, USC is displaying the flag of the Communists, not knowing that it is the symbol that a great majority of the Vietnamese in the States despise and hate. Most Vietnamese students in the disapora would not attend USC if the Communist flag is displayed. These students are more numerous than the ones came from Vietnam.
7. Through dissemination of information of how the community has viewed the Viet Cong flag with hatred and revulsion.
Wissai
From: Christine Trang <ctrang@usc.edu>Subject: Co Viet Cong at USCTo: anmai39@yahoo. comDate: Sunday, November 29, 2009, 5:52 PM
Here is a list of the questions I have for you. Please feel free to write as much as you would like, in either Vietnamese or English. I am planning on starting the article Wednesday, Dec. 2, so please send me the answers by Monday, Nov. 30 or Tuesday, Dec. 1. I greatly appreciate your time and attention!1) How did the actions of Vietnamese communists affect you personally? For example, what happened to you, your family or your friends?2) What are your thoughts, feelings or emotions when you see the Vietnamese communist flag? Why do you think or feel those things?3) What does the South Vietnamese flag mean to you and the Vietnamese community?4) Why do you think USC should display the South Vietnamese flag?5) Why do you think USC should not display the Vietnamese communist flag?6) Why do you think USC chose to display the Vietnamese communist flag? Do you think there is an economic reason for that? For example, there are a lot of students who come to USC from Vietnam. Do you think USC chose to display the Vietnamese communist flag to satisfy the government in Vietnam, so that the government there will continue to send more students to USC?7) What do you think the Vietnamese community should do to convince USC to display the South Vietnamese flag?If you have any questions, please feel free to call me on my cell phone at (310) 748-2342.Cam on bac!Regards, Christine Trang
Regarding Nguyen Huu Liem"s recent report on the conference
Regarding Nguyen Huu Liem's recent report about the grand conference of "Viet Kieu Yeu Nuoc" held in late November, 2009.
NHL's piece triggered some thoughts, as evidenced by the tally of 46 comments at the time his piece was brought to the attention of MC forum. Two of the comments were also posted in the forum. One was especially biting, likening NHL to no more than a sub-human animal trained by means of food inducement to parrot and ape the behavior of the trainer (VCP). It is common practice for humans to degrade and debase other humans whom they have no respect to the level of insects and beasts in order to express utter contempt. I have previously partaken in this practice. While the practice did give me momentary satisfaction, I didn't feel particularly good about myself afterwards as I realized that by calling and designating my fellow men by names of beasts and insects, I exhibited lack of originality and a loving heart, the very deficiencies I accused of those whom I despised.
So, henceforth and that means today, I have decided to forsake the practice and just focus on the demerits of their arguments. For easy reference, I am going to touch upon the points mentioned by NHL in the order presented by him.
1. Hegel's quote.I don't claim to know much about Hegel. Very few people could read him directly because of his turgid prose. What we know about him are usually indirect through others' comments and summaries. Hegel was known for his method of dialectics in reasoning and his sweeping view of history. Hegel had an impact on Marx. Hegel didn't pay attention to the role of individuals. To him, the state was everything. NHL apparently shared that view. But let us ponder on the merit of the quote. First, it is a question if there's indeed a God as we usually conceive Him, a being who takes an interest in human affairs. Second, to assert that "The State is the march of God on earth" requires a leap of faith that I and others to whom faculty of reasoning is something real and should be exercised, are not comfortable to do. To us, the metaphor is pure nonsense. It is akin to saying that those groups and tribes who have no states of their own are somehow disconnected with God. I didn't know God practiced discrimination. If he does, I don't want him. Third, the state is just an abstraction; it is a name for an agglomeration of individuals bound by some commonalities. In the end, individual persons in the flesh are the ones that count. Those who glorify the state are the ones that tend to embrace totalitarian tendencies for their own benefits, and not for the state (agglomeration of individuals) at all. Those people are usually Marxist in their thinking whose followers are found in the Poliburo of the VCP.
2. NHL badmouthed the very Army under which he once served in the second sentence of his report. He was lucky to get out of Vietnam by helicopter. Why did he still carry his pistol while riding the helicopter? If he despised the ARVN, why didn't stay behind and welcome the "Liberation" Army of the VC? The character of NHL was revealed in the remaining sentences of the first paragraph. He was a fearful creature, devoid of courage, and consumed with a desire to live with any costs and at any price. Now he was relieved and proud to come back to Vietnam, as a guest of the VCP. What a piece of garbage! See, true to my words, I didn't call him by any names of insects and beasts.
3. The third paragraph described his relief and joy of being treated with courtesy and consideration by the officials of the state. I don't know why he bothered to reveal this unnecessary detail other than betraying his deep-rooted fear and insecurity. Of course, the state would and should treat him with courtesy and consideration, as it was in the interest of those who control the state to do so. Perhaps he forgot that the conference was a showcase of propanganda. The poor man was so affected by the exterior that he could not discern what the exterior represented.
4. The next paragraphs found him waxing poetic about phemenonlogy and its founder, Husserl. I don't know much about Hegel. And I don't know much about Husserl. I only know that he had an impact on Sartre and Heidegger, the two existentialists. I must admit that I found NHL eloquent in his discouse in these paragraphs. I wonder if these are his words distilled from long nights of perusing the words of Husserl or he merely parroted the words of somebody else and rendered them in Vietnamese. But, wait a minute, I was hasty in giving NHL credit since it was clear he was explaining Husserl via the words of Derrida, the father of deconstruction.I wonder the purpose of NHL in invoking Husserl and then Ly Dong A and Truc Duc Thao ((whom I absolutely know nothing about) in his report. He also mentioned the role of history and the role of the VCP. I don't know much about history, but I know this much: China is our historical enemy. It is encroaching on the territories of Vietnam. The VCP is not fulfilling its role as the sole party in the land entrusted with the duties of governing and preserving our territorial integrity. The populace is restless. Some brave intellectuals voiced their displeasure at the VCP for its strange muted response in the face of increasing belligerence of China. For their demonstrations of patriotism, these patriots were thrown into jail. I would respect NHL a little bit if he had the courage to say something about this matter. But by the time I got this far in this self -serving and unctuous report, I didn't expect anything from him except to see how far he traveled in the path of depravity.
5. He didn't disappoint me because in the next paragraph he proudly told us that the bus in which he rode along with other "delegates" to the conference hall was led by a police car in full siren. The implication was that he was one of the VIPs who got preferential treatment in traffic. There was no doubt in my mind then NHL enjoyed pomp and pageantry and every little morsel and bone of glory the VCP threw at him.
6. The next two paragraphs were devoted to shameless kowtowing to the Hanoi regime with flowery language. By this time his language was tiresome and predictable. I lost interest in his "narrative", but I forced myself to continue reading, no longer driven by intellectual curiosity, but by a reluctance to quit in mid-stream.
7. So, I soldiered on, only to be rewarded by a fantastical story of a French-trained architect Truong in his late 60's who has been working for years in Vietnam training future generation of architects and involving in urban planning, without salary and without reimbursement for his expenses. I would love to meet Mr. Truong to verify the story since it is too fantastical, too amazing for me to grasp. I am glad Mr. Truong is an architect and not a fisherman otherwise we would be regaled with tall tales about fish.
8. My annoyance with NHL turned to full blown anger when he gushed praise on the VC flag and the national anthem while expressing indifference to the Star Spangled Banner, calling the anthem of the country which has sheltered him and given him employment for 34 years, foreign. What an ingrate! What a piece of human trash! Mind you, I am not a kneejerk USA lover. I regard myself first and foremost Vietnamese, but I love and appreciate good old USA which has given me a decent standard of living and which shows me the meaning of freedom and dignity. For those reasons, I stand up in full attention and I am overwhelmeded with emotions whenever the Star Spangled Banner is played.
9. NHL could not help himself. He loved dropping names of thinkers. At the end of his report which would not surprise me if it turned out that it was commissioned by Hanoi, he invoked Paul Ricoeur, a French philosopher, of whom I know nothing about, apart from the fact he is French. I am too dumb to understand the quote he attributed to Ricoeur. I was completely lost. I have a feeling that his VC handlers in Hanoi were also lost regarding the way this chicken man expressed himself.He mercifully concluded his long, rambling report by confessing that he was a fearful person and that he is not yet a free man. I wonder if he realized how true his departing words were.
P.S.
A person's words reveal his character. I am painfully aware of that fact. I wrote about NHL's report as part of my own journey of self-discovery. I know my own character needs a lot of work.
In the end, we all need to be true to ourselves. People are not as stupid as we think they are. Sooner or later, they can see through our fears, our insecurity, our inferiority complex, and our self-deception in spite of our cover-ups with names of thinkers, quotes in arcane languages, and displays of learning and scholarship.
Deep down, I understand why there are people like NHL. They answer to their biological desire to survive and cast aside abstract, impractical concerns like honor, dignity, fairness, and patriotism. They use their intelligence to overcome the call of higher values and congratulate themselves as being truly smart and clever. They laugh at patriots as being stupid and impractical.
What I don't understand is their lack of consistency. If they love Hanoi and worship Trung Cong (they dare not, would not even use the terms Trung Cong. To them, it has to be Trung Quoc this and Trung Quoc that. It is not a question of politeness. It's more a question of slavish mentality, a question of despicable mindset) then why don't they go back to Vietnam and openly declare their affiliation? It's far more honorable that way than hiding in the U.S., Australia, or wherever and being parasites in the host countries.
Wissai
Nov . 29, 2009
NHL's piece triggered some thoughts, as evidenced by the tally of 46 comments at the time his piece was brought to the attention of MC forum. Two of the comments were also posted in the forum. One was especially biting, likening NHL to no more than a sub-human animal trained by means of food inducement to parrot and ape the behavior of the trainer (VCP). It is common practice for humans to degrade and debase other humans whom they have no respect to the level of insects and beasts in order to express utter contempt. I have previously partaken in this practice. While the practice did give me momentary satisfaction, I didn't feel particularly good about myself afterwards as I realized that by calling and designating my fellow men by names of beasts and insects, I exhibited lack of originality and a loving heart, the very deficiencies I accused of those whom I despised.
So, henceforth and that means today, I have decided to forsake the practice and just focus on the demerits of their arguments. For easy reference, I am going to touch upon the points mentioned by NHL in the order presented by him.
1. Hegel's quote.I don't claim to know much about Hegel. Very few people could read him directly because of his turgid prose. What we know about him are usually indirect through others' comments and summaries. Hegel was known for his method of dialectics in reasoning and his sweeping view of history. Hegel had an impact on Marx. Hegel didn't pay attention to the role of individuals. To him, the state was everything. NHL apparently shared that view. But let us ponder on the merit of the quote. First, it is a question if there's indeed a God as we usually conceive Him, a being who takes an interest in human affairs. Second, to assert that "The State is the march of God on earth" requires a leap of faith that I and others to whom faculty of reasoning is something real and should be exercised, are not comfortable to do. To us, the metaphor is pure nonsense. It is akin to saying that those groups and tribes who have no states of their own are somehow disconnected with God. I didn't know God practiced discrimination. If he does, I don't want him. Third, the state is just an abstraction; it is a name for an agglomeration of individuals bound by some commonalities. In the end, individual persons in the flesh are the ones that count. Those who glorify the state are the ones that tend to embrace totalitarian tendencies for their own benefits, and not for the state (agglomeration of individuals) at all. Those people are usually Marxist in their thinking whose followers are found in the Poliburo of the VCP.
2. NHL badmouthed the very Army under which he once served in the second sentence of his report. He was lucky to get out of Vietnam by helicopter. Why did he still carry his pistol while riding the helicopter? If he despised the ARVN, why didn't stay behind and welcome the "Liberation" Army of the VC? The character of NHL was revealed in the remaining sentences of the first paragraph. He was a fearful creature, devoid of courage, and consumed with a desire to live with any costs and at any price. Now he was relieved and proud to come back to Vietnam, as a guest of the VCP. What a piece of garbage! See, true to my words, I didn't call him by any names of insects and beasts.
3. The third paragraph described his relief and joy of being treated with courtesy and consideration by the officials of the state. I don't know why he bothered to reveal this unnecessary detail other than betraying his deep-rooted fear and insecurity. Of course, the state would and should treat him with courtesy and consideration, as it was in the interest of those who control the state to do so. Perhaps he forgot that the conference was a showcase of propanganda. The poor man was so affected by the exterior that he could not discern what the exterior represented.
4. The next paragraphs found him waxing poetic about phemenonlogy and its founder, Husserl. I don't know much about Hegel. And I don't know much about Husserl. I only know that he had an impact on Sartre and Heidegger, the two existentialists. I must admit that I found NHL eloquent in his discouse in these paragraphs. I wonder if these are his words distilled from long nights of perusing the words of Husserl or he merely parroted the words of somebody else and rendered them in Vietnamese. But, wait a minute, I was hasty in giving NHL credit since it was clear he was explaining Husserl via the words of Derrida, the father of deconstruction.I wonder the purpose of NHL in invoking Husserl and then Ly Dong A and Truc Duc Thao ((whom I absolutely know nothing about) in his report. He also mentioned the role of history and the role of the VCP. I don't know much about history, but I know this much: China is our historical enemy. It is encroaching on the territories of Vietnam. The VCP is not fulfilling its role as the sole party in the land entrusted with the duties of governing and preserving our territorial integrity. The populace is restless. Some brave intellectuals voiced their displeasure at the VCP for its strange muted response in the face of increasing belligerence of China. For their demonstrations of patriotism, these patriots were thrown into jail. I would respect NHL a little bit if he had the courage to say something about this matter. But by the time I got this far in this self -serving and unctuous report, I didn't expect anything from him except to see how far he traveled in the path of depravity.
5. He didn't disappoint me because in the next paragraph he proudly told us that the bus in which he rode along with other "delegates" to the conference hall was led by a police car in full siren. The implication was that he was one of the VIPs who got preferential treatment in traffic. There was no doubt in my mind then NHL enjoyed pomp and pageantry and every little morsel and bone of glory the VCP threw at him.
6. The next two paragraphs were devoted to shameless kowtowing to the Hanoi regime with flowery language. By this time his language was tiresome and predictable. I lost interest in his "narrative", but I forced myself to continue reading, no longer driven by intellectual curiosity, but by a reluctance to quit in mid-stream.
7. So, I soldiered on, only to be rewarded by a fantastical story of a French-trained architect Truong in his late 60's who has been working for years in Vietnam training future generation of architects and involving in urban planning, without salary and without reimbursement for his expenses. I would love to meet Mr. Truong to verify the story since it is too fantastical, too amazing for me to grasp. I am glad Mr. Truong is an architect and not a fisherman otherwise we would be regaled with tall tales about fish.
8. My annoyance with NHL turned to full blown anger when he gushed praise on the VC flag and the national anthem while expressing indifference to the Star Spangled Banner, calling the anthem of the country which has sheltered him and given him employment for 34 years, foreign. What an ingrate! What a piece of human trash! Mind you, I am not a kneejerk USA lover. I regard myself first and foremost Vietnamese, but I love and appreciate good old USA which has given me a decent standard of living and which shows me the meaning of freedom and dignity. For those reasons, I stand up in full attention and I am overwhelmeded with emotions whenever the Star Spangled Banner is played.
9. NHL could not help himself. He loved dropping names of thinkers. At the end of his report which would not surprise me if it turned out that it was commissioned by Hanoi, he invoked Paul Ricoeur, a French philosopher, of whom I know nothing about, apart from the fact he is French. I am too dumb to understand the quote he attributed to Ricoeur. I was completely lost. I have a feeling that his VC handlers in Hanoi were also lost regarding the way this chicken man expressed himself.He mercifully concluded his long, rambling report by confessing that he was a fearful person and that he is not yet a free man. I wonder if he realized how true his departing words were.
P.S.
A person's words reveal his character. I am painfully aware of that fact. I wrote about NHL's report as part of my own journey of self-discovery. I know my own character needs a lot of work.
In the end, we all need to be true to ourselves. People are not as stupid as we think they are. Sooner or later, they can see through our fears, our insecurity, our inferiority complex, and our self-deception in spite of our cover-ups with names of thinkers, quotes in arcane languages, and displays of learning and scholarship.
Deep down, I understand why there are people like NHL. They answer to their biological desire to survive and cast aside abstract, impractical concerns like honor, dignity, fairness, and patriotism. They use their intelligence to overcome the call of higher values and congratulate themselves as being truly smart and clever. They laugh at patriots as being stupid and impractical.
What I don't understand is their lack of consistency. If they love Hanoi and worship Trung Cong (they dare not, would not even use the terms Trung Cong. To them, it has to be Trung Quoc this and Trung Quoc that. It is not a question of politeness. It's more a question of slavish mentality, a question of despicable mindset) then why don't they go back to Vietnam and openly declare their affiliation? It's far more honorable that way than hiding in the U.S., Australia, or wherever and being parasites in the host countries.
Wissai
Nov . 29, 2009
Political Courage
“I hate war,” said Dwight Eisenhower, “as only a soldier who has lived it can, as one who has seen its brutality, its futility, its stupidity.” He also said, “Every gun that is made, every warship launched, every rocket fired, signifies in the final sense a theft from those who hunger and are not fed, those who are cold and not clothed.”
I suppose we’ll never learn. President Obama will go on TV Tuesday night to announce that he plans to send tens of thousands of additional American troops to Afghanistan to fight in a war that has lasted most of the decade and has long since failed.
After going through an extended period of highly ritualized consultations and deliberations, the president has arrived at a decision that never was much in doubt, and that will prove to be a tragic mistake. It was also, for the president, the easier option.
It would have been much more difficult for Mr. Obama to look this troubled nation in the eye and explain why it is in our best interest to begin winding down the permanent state of warfare left to us by the Bush and Cheney regime. It would have taken real courage for the commander in chief to stop feeding our young troops into the relentless meat grinder of Afghanistan, to face up to the terrible toll the war is taking — on the troops themselves and in very insidious ways on the nation as a whole.
More soldiers committed suicide this year than in any year for which we have complete records. But the military is now able to meet its recruitment goals because the young men and women who are signing up can’t find jobs in civilian life. The United States is broken — school systems are deteriorating, the economy is in shambles, homelessness and poverty rates are expanding — yet we’re nation-building in Afghanistan, sending economically distressed young people over there by the tens of thousands at an annual cost of a million dollars each.
I keep hearing that Americans are concerned about gargantuan budget deficits. Well, the idea that you can control mounting deficits while engaged in two wars that you refuse to raise taxes to pay for is a patent absurdity. Small children might believe something along those lines. Rational adults should not.
Politicians are seldom honest when they talk publicly about warfare. Lyndon Johnson knew in the spring of 1965, as he made plans for the first big expansion of U.S. forces in Vietnam, that there was no upside to the war. A recent Bill Moyers program on PBS played audio tapes of Johnson on which he could be heard telling Defense Secretary Robert McNamara, “Not a damn human thinks that 50,000 or 100,000 or 150,000 [American troops] are going to end that war.” cNamara replies, “That’s right.” Nothing like those sentiments were conveyed to the public as Johnson and McNamara jacked up the draft and started feeding young American boys and men into the Vietnam meat grinder.
Bob Herbert
New YorK Times Columist
Afghanistan is not Vietnam. There was every reason for American forces to invade Afghanistan in the immediate aftermath of Sept. 11, 2001. But that war was botched and lost by the Bush crowd, and Barack Obama does not have a magic wand now to make it all better.
The word is that Mr. Obama will tell the public Tuesday that he is sending another 30,000 or so troops to Afghanistan. And while it is reported that he has some strategy in mind for eventually turning the fight over to the ragtag and less-than-energetic Afghan military, it’s clear that U.S. forces will be engaged for years to come, perhaps many years.
The tougher choice for the president would have been to tell the public that the U.S. is a nation faced with terrible troubles here at home and that it is time to begin winding down a war that veered wildly off track years ago. But that would have taken great political courage. It would have left Mr. Obama vulnerable to the charge of being weak, of cutting and running, of betraying the troops who have already served. The Republicans would have a field day with that scenario.
Lyndon Johnson is heard on the tapes telling Senator Richard Russell, chairman of the Armed Services Committee, about a comment made by a Texas rancher in the days leading up to the buildup in Vietnam. The rancher had told Johnson that the public would forgive the president “for everything except being weak.” Russell said: “Well, there’s a lot in that. There’s a whole lot in that.”
We still haven’t learned to recognize real strength, which is why it so often seems that the easier choice for a president is to keep the troops marching off to war.
I suppose we’ll never learn. President Obama will go on TV Tuesday night to announce that he plans to send tens of thousands of additional American troops to Afghanistan to fight in a war that has lasted most of the decade and has long since failed.
After going through an extended period of highly ritualized consultations and deliberations, the president has arrived at a decision that never was much in doubt, and that will prove to be a tragic mistake. It was also, for the president, the easier option.
It would have been much more difficult for Mr. Obama to look this troubled nation in the eye and explain why it is in our best interest to begin winding down the permanent state of warfare left to us by the Bush and Cheney regime. It would have taken real courage for the commander in chief to stop feeding our young troops into the relentless meat grinder of Afghanistan, to face up to the terrible toll the war is taking — on the troops themselves and in very insidious ways on the nation as a whole.
More soldiers committed suicide this year than in any year for which we have complete records. But the military is now able to meet its recruitment goals because the young men and women who are signing up can’t find jobs in civilian life. The United States is broken — school systems are deteriorating, the economy is in shambles, homelessness and poverty rates are expanding — yet we’re nation-building in Afghanistan, sending economically distressed young people over there by the tens of thousands at an annual cost of a million dollars each.
I keep hearing that Americans are concerned about gargantuan budget deficits. Well, the idea that you can control mounting deficits while engaged in two wars that you refuse to raise taxes to pay for is a patent absurdity. Small children might believe something along those lines. Rational adults should not.
Politicians are seldom honest when they talk publicly about warfare. Lyndon Johnson knew in the spring of 1965, as he made plans for the first big expansion of U.S. forces in Vietnam, that there was no upside to the war. A recent Bill Moyers program on PBS played audio tapes of Johnson on which he could be heard telling Defense Secretary Robert McNamara, “Not a damn human thinks that 50,000 or 100,000 or 150,000 [American troops] are going to end that war.” cNamara replies, “That’s right.” Nothing like those sentiments were conveyed to the public as Johnson and McNamara jacked up the draft and started feeding young American boys and men into the Vietnam meat grinder.
Bob Herbert
New YorK Times Columist
Afghanistan is not Vietnam. There was every reason for American forces to invade Afghanistan in the immediate aftermath of Sept. 11, 2001. But that war was botched and lost by the Bush crowd, and Barack Obama does not have a magic wand now to make it all better.
The word is that Mr. Obama will tell the public Tuesday that he is sending another 30,000 or so troops to Afghanistan. And while it is reported that he has some strategy in mind for eventually turning the fight over to the ragtag and less-than-energetic Afghan military, it’s clear that U.S. forces will be engaged for years to come, perhaps many years.
The tougher choice for the president would have been to tell the public that the U.S. is a nation faced with terrible troubles here at home and that it is time to begin winding down a war that veered wildly off track years ago. But that would have taken great political courage. It would have left Mr. Obama vulnerable to the charge of being weak, of cutting and running, of betraying the troops who have already served. The Republicans would have a field day with that scenario.
Lyndon Johnson is heard on the tapes telling Senator Richard Russell, chairman of the Armed Services Committee, about a comment made by a Texas rancher in the days leading up to the buildup in Vietnam. The rancher had told Johnson that the public would forgive the president “for everything except being weak.” Russell said: “Well, there’s a lot in that. There’s a whole lot in that.”
We still haven’t learned to recognize real strength, which is why it so often seems that the easier choice for a president is to keep the troops marching off to war.
Knowledge, Power, and Freedom
I enjoyed the movie The Contender (2000) very much. The Senator and the Congressman in the movie were wonderful actors. I also like the quote delivered by Jeff Bridges. It resonated with me because I have plenty of pettiness and none of greatness. But it is not (political) power I am seeking. I am after knowledge which gives me a sense of liberation and freedom that Ifind more enjoyable than naked political power. On the other hand, I absolutely hate the notion that somebody would have power over me, forcing me do things I don't wish to do. In the final analysis, to have power over oneself-- on how to think critically, on how to live responsibly and meaningfully, gives a person, in my opinion, far greater joy than chasing political power unless one is committed to bringing good "things" to one's people when one achieves power.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)