Liberty, Equality and Fraternity.
A friend of mine has that tattooed on his arm and it's a cool idea. I'm for it. It's French, right? And it means something, yes? How much does it mean, though, when the country lets in dictators, like, recent ones. Mubarak is just the latest, yes? (Of course America engages in the same behavior. Wanted to make that clear.) I guess liberty must apply to former strongmen as well, but...it just seems so at odds with the motto of the country.
Of course: Every country is like that. Every country has its nasty secret, the things that undermine its greatest ambitions, the things that hold it back and the little deals made to keep it going. America's are obvious. Look at the history of the CIA and the little things agreed to in the name of the people of democracy become clear.
It's in Liberty, Equality and Fraternity, though that Rawls tries to tie into A Theory of Justice, saying that the liberty parallel is obvious, equality under the law and fraternity in the difference principle. And liberty for all, I guess, really means liberty for all, unless, say, you're Muslim and want to wear a hijab, but didn't these dictators kind of...say, by virtue of killing a lot of people, get their personhood card revoked? That's a thing.
And yet we're still treating them as people. Why? Because of what we're still doing now. Mubarak was an ally in the War On Terror. Camus didn't just die of a car crash, but a broken heart. Eastern Europe, I guess, is ocassionally happy to have our political prisoners to torture until they confess to murdering Santa Claus, or whatever their hosts want to hear them say. Eastern Europe tortured our prisoners so we could keep our hands clean. And probably still does.
A friend of mine has that tattooed on his arm and it's a cool idea. I'm for it. It's French, right? And it means something, yes? How much does it mean, though, when the country lets in dictators, like, recent ones. Mubarak is just the latest, yes? (Of course America engages in the same behavior. Wanted to make that clear.) I guess liberty must apply to former strongmen as well, but...it just seems so at odds with the motto of the country.
Of course: Every country is like that. Every country has its nasty secret, the things that undermine its greatest ambitions, the things that hold it back and the little deals made to keep it going. America's are obvious. Look at the history of the CIA and the little things agreed to in the name of the people of democracy become clear.
It's in Liberty, Equality and Fraternity, though that Rawls tries to tie into A Theory of Justice, saying that the liberty parallel is obvious, equality under the law and fraternity in the difference principle. And liberty for all, I guess, really means liberty for all, unless, say, you're Muslim and want to wear a hijab, but didn't these dictators kind of...say, by virtue of killing a lot of people, get their personhood card revoked? That's a thing.
And yet we're still treating them as people. Why? Because of what we're still doing now. Mubarak was an ally in the War On Terror. Camus didn't just die of a car crash, but a broken heart. Eastern Europe, I guess, is ocassionally happy to have our political prisoners to torture until they confess to murdering Santa Claus, or whatever their hosts want to hear them say. Eastern Europe tortured our prisoners so we could keep our hands clean. And probably still does.
And yet, even after reading Rucka's Private Wars, that has an intense scene about just this (and also about justice, later on, kind of), a recent book, I can still sit here and type about any kind of justice without laughing.
It would give Bolano something else to write about, if he wasn't already dead. Funnily enough, I finished By Night In Chile and it made me angry. I'll write about it for Friday.
Why Fall Out Boy's Grand Theft Autumn? None worth giving. I wanted to hear it again. I'm not sure what to make of the bits with the girl. I'm not quite sure of the politics. If you have a better idea than I do, comment!
No comments:
Post a Comment