America as Empire?

As you have read, Norman Mailer, in his book Why Are We at War?, suggests that the real reason for America’s current war with Iraq is to build a global empire. He writes:

Behind the whole push to go to war with Iraq is the desire to have a huge military presence in the Middle East as a stepping-stone to taking over the rest of the world. (51)

What main reason can you pick out of the text and your life that supports or negates his argument? In what ways do you see this working in your daily life? That is, you may not agree with Mailer about all the reasons he gives for the Iraqi war, but this blog is asking that you consider his explanations and evidence within the context of your life.

In other words: support or negate any aspect of Mailer’s argument by citing evidence from your daily life.

Why Are We at War?

After reading Norman Mailer’s essay Why Are We at War?, pick a point (out of many that the book argues) that you either agree with or disagree with. Choose any point that he makes that you can argue for or against based on your own understanding and experience — you should not have to cite external sources for this assignment. After you write your introduction, summarize Mailer’s point briefly, then write your response to it for the remainder of the blog entry.

High Technology

How do you see human achievements in computer technology affecting humanity in general? Do you consider technology a boon, something that should be pursued at any cost, or would you like to see limits put on the creation and use of new technologies? Read Bill Joy’s “Why the Future Doesn’t Need Us” and comment on Joy’s solution. What is the problem as he sees it and his solution? Do you agree? Find at least one other contrasting view on the Web. You might start with Rants & Raves or at KurzweilAI.

Hijack!

An airliner is hijacked by terrorists who threaten to blow up the plane and all its passengers if your nation does not release from custody certain convicted criminals. If it was your responsibility to decide how your nation would respond, what would your decision be? Why? (Are there any basic moral principles involved in the criteria for your decision?)

Consider the U.S.’s policy on terrorism by examining several of the documents at the “Terrorism: Threat Assessment, Countermeasures, and Policy” site. Once you feel you can articulate, in general, just what this country’s official policy regarding terrorism is, write your journal entry. Are there any points that you uncovered that do not agree with your own beliefs? You may want to do an Internet search on commentary about U.S. foreign policy. Consider pages like “U.S. Policies Contribute to Acts of Terrorism.”

The X-Files Effect

“There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, / Than are dreamt of in your philosophy.” (Hamlet 1.5.175-6)

Throughout the entire recorded history of humankind, events have been reported that our best scientific minds could not explain. How do you tend to respond to reports of events such as encounters with ghosts, psychic phenomena, UFO sightings, etc.? If you give any credence to any such stories, how do you reconcile this with your general view of the nature of the world? How do you integrate these thoughts with your spiritual views?

The Paradox of Labor

In the beginning was the capitalist, but his ability to make a profit was dependent upon production, which meant that he needed workers. Many more people needed work than there were jobs available, so the owners did not have to pay much salary nor be at all concerned with the working conditions of their employees. When people complained, they were told to go and work elsewhere, but there were no jobs. They joined together into unions and told their bosses that if they were not treated better, not only would they strike, they would not allow anyone else to work in that factory. When the owners brought in other workers to cross the picket lines, they were beaten and even killed. In the attempts to force them to bargain for better conditions, the strikers sabotaged machinery, destroyed property, and halted production, cutting off the capitalists’ means of making profit. Thus, collective bargaining was invented.

Workers were not paid a living wage; many jobs were unsafe; no one forced them to work; they could quit if they chose. The property they destroyed did not belong to them; during strikes, those who wanted to work were not allowed to do so by the other strikers. Genuine negotiations never seem to occur unless both sides have something to gain and something to lose; the basic thrust of the early labor movement was to give the capitalist something to lose if he did not bargain “fairly.”

Examine the morality of people destroying what is not theirs; telling another that he cannot run a business unless he gives them a certain cut of his profits; and telling others that they cannot work for the factory owner until he agrees to their earlier demands. What is the difference between this kind of behavior and a mafia extortion racket which says if you don’t pay for protection, your business will burn down? Where is right and wrong to be found in this issue?

Kate’s Conundrum

Kate, a liberal and well-to-do holder of a graduate degree in social work, decides that she can do the most good in the social services department of a rural county in a southern state.

In a few years she has established relationships of trust with her clients. Now two of those clients are posing a problem for her. A young girl in one of her families is pregnant. The girl and her sister are both in their early teens and have left school as “uneducable.” The family is grindingly poor and virtually illiterate; the father has a problem with alcohol.

Kate has started discussing with the family their plans to care for the baby, which they want, and sent the girl to the clinic for evaluation. Now she has learned that the county health officials have arranged for both girls to be hospitalized and sterilized, without their knowledge or consent.

Involuntary, uninformed sterilization is legal in her county, and her fellow workers keep mentioning swollen welfare rolls. But Kate keeps remembering her professional and personal commitment to the value and dignity of human life. She wants to talk with the family, to allow them to choose, but she is told that she is too idealistic. What should Kate do?

Competition

What importance do you place on competition as a component of the growth of personality and character? Is it an essential experience which should be cultivated in children? Is it an experience which would not exist in a perfect world? Should there be competition in public schools such as band and chorus contests, spelling bees, athletic events, art contests, science awards? What damage is done to the child who can never win?

Too Much?

Exercising a prerogative provided by law, President Carter endorsed a “Cuban boat lift” which flooded Florida with thousands of refugees — many of whom were already identified in Cuba as “undesirables.” The seldomly disputed result of this decision has been a significant undermining of health and economic conditions as well as jeopardizing the personal safety of many residents of south Florida.

Do you agree with a law that allows the President to make such a decision without the approval of Congress? Should the United States be open to all without restriction or limitation? Who should take financial responsibility for refugees? Should everyone in the country have the same rights of “due process under the law” as any citizen enjoys?

What Makes Life Worthwhile?

Thomas Hobbes claimed that survival is basic in nature and, therefore, should be primary as we consider our relationship to government. To the rhetorical question, “Is life so dear or peace so sweet as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery?” Hobbes would have responded: “Absolutely — everything is better than being dead.” How precious is “life itself”? Are there some things without which life would not be worthwhile to you? What would you risk your life for? What would you give it for?