Think you’re going to violate one of the other responsibilities if you follow that route?
You live in a democracy. You elect a government (Bush for example). The government does things you don’t want it to do (Torture - Invading Iraq). Bush then gets re-elected. Seems pretty simple to me that you agree, as a country, with what he was doing. That you say you, and many others, protested what he was doing obviously matters not a hill of beans as you were unsuccessful in stopping it. So, you, being part of your country, bear as much responsibility as the next guy. Saying, “Nuh uh!”, doesn’t ‘absolve’ you of anything. The government represents you even if the guy you voted for didn’t win.
You say you didn’t vote for Bush, but what proof do you have that you didn’t do so? Voting is anonymous. Regardless, your government represents you (you as a collective people) on the world stage. Don’t like what they are doing, do something about it that actually makes a difference. And it sucks if the majority doesn’t agree with you. That’s why you then make the choice to go somewhere that better reflects your will, or accept that change may take a long time, but shit is going to happen that you don’t like in the mean time. That doesn’t alleviate your responsibility for that shit, though.
Is it or is it not your stated opinion that most protests and protesters who opine loudly against Israel are motivated by anti-semitism?
And if so, should that not lead us to believe that you find the opinions they espouse to be irrelevant to the point where they can in fact be ignored by Israel because they are anti-semitic, by definition?
And if not, could you point me to an example of a critique of Israel that, a) is not anti-semitic, and, b) that you endorse?
That is not anti-semitic - for example, Obama’s “criticism” of Israel. I don’t think Obama is an anti-semite. I think he is a hypocritical asshole who for political reasons publicly judges Israel by a higher standard that he does his own military that has a higher civilian to militant ratio in its own attacks. But not an anti-semite.
So you are completely in step with Israel’s policies both in Gaza and West Bank? I suppose there have to be some who are. Otherwise they would not persist.
No. I think they are way too hesitant to act and I think the withdrawal from Gaza and the Oslo process was a huge mistake. Which is, by the way, what even the Israeli leftists who pushed for it admit now.
When you look back on a decision that hasn’t worked out the way you had hoped, you always wonder if the alternative would have been better. Truth is, there were no good options. Six of one… etc…
My memory. In what court is responsibility judged? That’s why I asked for you to define it. None of the other responsibilities you mentioned are things that are valid only when externally verified (if I take care of my kids, I don’t have to prove that to anyone in order to fulfill my responsibility to them, I just have to do it). I’m not sure what underlying principles govern your idea of responsibility–is this a moral absolutist thing, as I prefer, or some version of moral relativism, and if it is, what sort? It really seems incoherent to me.
Such as…? This is where you run into further problems: if someone has no choice that makes a difference, it’s not a real choice, and it’s silly to hold them responsible for its outcomes.
What if the government claims to represent me even after I leave, what then? What if they don’t let me leave, what then?
I really don’t think your idea is coherent, and while I absolutely don’t think you’re a Nazi, I think your sense of collective guilt has more in common with fascist and terrorist ideologies than with a rights-based tradition.
Anyways, what court? Unless you’ve broken the law and are arrested, there is no court.
In a war a bomb doesn’t know if you’re for or against the war. So, if you are against the war, then you have to do something to prevent being bombed. If you are for the war, then a bomb is the consequence of your actions.
You focus on one side of the coin missing the fact that there are no rights without people accepting responsibility for upholding and maintaining those rights. If you want to understand what I’m saying then this is it.
Citizens of England could and should have done what about the German bombing raides? How could they have prevented them? How could Poland and France have avoided German invasion?
In what way were African slaves responsible for their fate? What responsibility do the Jews bear for the holocaust? Please give examples of how these two groups broke the ‘two sided coin’ compact?
Without a court, why are you talking about evidence? Are responsibilities things I need to do, or things I need to prove to other people I need to do?
This has nothing to do with responsibility, though–it’s just a statement of cause and effect.
Absolutely not–how familiar are you with the rights-based tradition of philosophical thought? Rights impose a negative moral duty on moral agents, under a common formulation, and that negative moral duty is a responsibility for those moral agents. This formulation is very different from the collective guilt formulation you prefer, which, again, is much closer to the formulation offered by terrorist groups and fascist regimes than to the formulation used in the US Constitution, the UN Charter of Human Rights, and other major documents in the rights-based tradition (which, again, includes responsibilities–just doesn’t establish collective guilt).
Native land claims out the window? Any debt accumulated by the nation prior to when you were born? There are a whole host of things you are responsible for by being a citizen of your country that happened before you were born.
If, for example, tomorrow everyone else disappeared and you were the only one left, who do you think the creditors would be talking to to settle any debts (assuming they don’t just ignore you and take whats left)? Some nebulous government? No, you. There government is made up of representatives. Who do you think they represent? The government? No, you the people. They are your proxy.
I should point out that despite being British I don’t actually live in the UK and haven’t done since 1999. I also lose my right to vote in the UK in November, so do I get a pass after that? Because this shit is important to me, obviously.
I also think you are making far too much of the idea that “the people are the state”, I believe there is a clear distinction. Pretty much the same way that I don’t blame American citizens for the Iraq idiocy, especially those that didn’t vote for anyone that supported it. Or even don’t have a right to vote.