[Peace-discuss] Repeating a lie ad nauseam

[C. G. Estabrook]

If there's any sense at all in this bit of intentional silliness, it's 
the revelation of the tacit assumption, explicit in European politics of 
the early 20th century, that things will improve only when the good 
leader emerges.  That seems to me a dangerous, indeed sub-political, notion.

For people who believe in democracy -- a goal, by no means an existing 
reality -- attention to how leaders of a polity get to where they are, 
particularly what interests they serve to get there, leads to hesitation 
in calling them good.  A good leader would seem to be in the first place 
one who serves the interests of the majority, not the opposing interests 
of a minority.  (James Madison said about the 1787 constitution that its 
  goal was not democracy, which he and his good colleagues saw as 
dangerous, but "to protect the minority of the opulent against the 
majority.")

Making good political judgments probably requires knowing something 
about history. --CGE


Bob Illyes wrote:
> Hi Marti.
> 
> I can explain it all, in bad logic. There have been no good presidents 
> (Carl assures me). Obama may be the president. Therefore Obama is bad.
> 
> Even worse, Obama is a liberal, a group much maligned by Carl and 
> disliked by both the Marxist left for thwarting the revolution and by 
> the Libertarian right for insisting that there are more rights than just 
> those of property.
> 
> It is therefore irrelevant to ask if Obama misspoke or was misquoted in 
> the single source.
> 
>   QED
> 
> If you don't see the excessive complexity lurking beneath the surface of 
> the ongoing condemnation of Obama, look again. Another violation of 
> Occam's Razor is in evidence..... Obama is no angel, mind you, but who is?
> 
> Bob, unrepentant Occam guy
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Peace-discuss mailing list
> Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net
> http://lists.chambana.net/cgi-bin/listinfo/peace-discuss