The keyboard is mightier than the machine gun... The political, philosophical and general outpourings of a troubled soul living in Australia and blogging his Vietnam veteran's head off.
Nothing in this blog can be believed. If you think that
anything in this blog is true or factual, you'll need to verify
it from another source. Do you understand? No? Then read it again,
and repeat this process, until you understand that you cannot sue
me for anything you read here. Also, having been sucked into taking
part in the mass-murder of more than 3 million Vietnamese people
on behalf of U.S. Big Business "interests", I'm as mad as a cut snake (and broke) so it might be a bit silly to try to sue me anyway...
I'm still conflicted. Seems I'm doomed to die that way.
What am I on about?
Politics, of course. Or, more specifically, the politics of "the left".
The more I see, hear, and read, the more I drift to "the left". I consider myself to be firmly on the left side of politics. But, paradoxically, the more I examine "the left", the more confused I get.
One major issue for me is Anarchism (the political movement), and its influence on left-wing thought.
I've just finished reading Emma Goldman's autobiography Living My Life. This two-volume set was suggested to me by friends because I had expressed an inability to understand the rationality of anarchism as a political ideal.
Here's my dilemma:
Before reading Goldman, I saw anarchism as a device useful for tearing down corrupt regimes, but I also felt that once the corrupt regime had been torn down, the very same anarchistic principles will create a power vacuum which the next wave of despots will fill because it has no model for cultivating benign leadership.
After reading Goldman, I still see anarchism as a device useful for tearing down corrupt regimes, and her life's story has reinforced my suspicions that once the corrupt regime has been torn down, the very same anarchistic principles will create a power vacuum which the next wave of despots will fill because it provides no model for cultivating benign leadership.
For me the problem with anarchism is its negative attitude to _all_ forms of leadership. This, to me, is a classic case of throwing the baby out with the bath water. It seems to be based on what to me looks like a fallacy of logic which goes something like "bad leadership is bad, therefore all leadership is bad." I just can't buy that.
Don't bother commenting unless you consider yourself to be a genuine "lefty". I'm not giving free kicks to "the right" here.
The counter shown below displays the number of Israeli military personnel refusing to serve in the Occupied Territories. I applaud their integrity and their strength of character. To me they are heroes of peace and humanity.