The problem is that Griffith exhibited his own brand of intolerance. He was also the director of the famous film “Birth of a Nation”, based on the novels of Thomas Dixon, in which African-Americans in the post-Civil War era are shown as lecherous animals whose only concern is filling their pockets with ill-gotten money and sexually molesting white women. Despite being a classic film and an amazing example of early cinematography and directing techniques, “Birth of a Nation” demonstrates Griffith’s (and Dixon’s) intolerance of ideas of racial equality. The film caused a furore in many parts of America when it was released in 1915; the NAACP protested strongly against it, and violence broke out at more than one cinema. You can’t find original accounts of this stuff in the New York Times of the period.
Regarding the “breaking down” of the causes of warfare, Beeblebrox chose to end his reduction at economics, but that seems arbitrary – no better warranted by the evidence than many other termini, including such worthies as religion or territoriality or xenophobia.
For my own preferred but possibly no better justified explanation, I favor faith as the main culprit, which I define briefly, roughly, and very broadly as largely unquestioned belief in non-empirical claims. Claims such as the belief in the supremacy of one’s own tribe’s culture or God. Or ideology.
For it seems to me that, without such claims, economic self-interest (as base as that can be in respects) would favor trade over terrorism.
As for these Great Debates, who could attribute them – at root – to more than the clash of ideologies, no matter how enlightened these may be? Even though we all seek to apply reason to, and gain knowledge from, these exchanges as well?
I see nothing in the least objectionable or ignoble about admitting that at least some core elements of ideology are central to these debates. As much as I would like to believe in Pure Reason, I cannot, for I have seen no evidence for it anywhere.
And why would we need the The BBQ Pit if our passions were not often inflamed by the conflict between various ideologies and religious beliefs?
The Great Debate forum is but warfare by other means.
No,I live in the UK and have never been to America.
I had to go (to my shame) and look up ‘Egalitarianism’: (believing that all people are equally important and should have the same rights and opportunities in life)
Hmmm, not quite sure why you’re asking me this, but I can only answer that there’s a big difference between ‘should have the same…’ and ‘do have the same…’ in the real world. (I’d like to think that I do my best to turn ‘should’ into ‘does’, but I’m just one man, however, my attempts to do this sometimes result in a great debate, thus also neatly supporting my suggestion that not all great debates are caused by one-upmanship)
Although on further thought; the pursuit of precise equality can be a distraction from the more important business of trying to get things to work in a way that is merely not unbearably uncomfortable for people.
