Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
This is my own term, I came up with it when I witnessed the *outrage* over hundreds of Guantanamo Bay prisoners while Cuba has been an oppressive dictatorship for decades, imprisoning many many more.
The response I generally got was "we hold the US to a higher standard".
This just popped in my mind again because there are about 17 or so Chinese guys in Guantanamo that they can't send home because they are likely to be killed etc. there. (And it would be the fault of the US if we relesased them to China...)
I guess it's just disappointing that Amnesty International would have thick reports (and no coincidence fund raising links) re: Guantanamo and then offer a paragraph or two on Cuba's abuses. Basically, they were using Guantanamo in conjunction with Bush being both republican and unpopular as a fund-raiser.
I personally don't like some of the actions of the US govt. but I *really* don't like lowering the human rights standards for other countries...or using the mistakes of the US to smoke-screen or deflect criticism.
What are your thoughts? Please, stick to topic, support your thoughts etc.
Any people here that send money to AI that would care to address my comments is greatly appreciated.
A large number of people are unhappy with their lot in life. As a result they need something or someone to blame (familiar theme?) because it can't be their fault, can it?
These are the types that run places like AI. While agree with the idea that the U.S. should not be holding prisoners indefinitely without cause, I also think that comparing them lopsidedly is a form of "Life Justification" for these people. "Life Justification" (my term) is when you justify your own life, and your own righteousness to yourself, and if you are lucky you will find others that need the same self justification.
Once the groups has been created anything and everything is fair game. And any means to justify your stance is allowable. Ignoring consequences is the theme of the day.
Your examples are right on the mark. Let's make sure that Guantanamo Bay doesn't happen again, but let's also not forget that there are governments very close to home that have done far worse and work to do something about them, too.
Returning citizens to countries that are likely to kill them or imprison them for life (torture?) is not acceptable and China is just one of many countries that are guilty of this.
I rarely give money to organizations of any kind. With the lack of responsibility shown by management in this country I figure the money doesn't end up where it's supposed to.
This is my own term, I came up with it when I witnessed the *outrage* over hundreds of Guantanamo Bay prisoners while Cuba has been an oppressive dictatorship for decades, imprisoning many many more.
The response I generally got was "we hold the US to a higher standard".
This just popped in my mind again because there are about 17 or so Chinese guys in Guantanamo that they can't send home because they are likely to be killed etc. there. (And it would be the fault of the US if we relesased them to China...)
I guess it's just disappointing that Amnesty International would have thick reports (and no coincidence fund raising links) re: Guantanamo and then offer a paragraph or two on Cuba's abuses. Basically, they were using Guantanamo in conjunction with Bush being both republican and unpopular as a fund-raiser.
I personally don't like some of the actions of the US govt. but I *really* don't like lowering the human rights standards for other countries...or using the mistakes of the US to smoke-screen or deflect criticism.
What are your thoughts? Please, stick to topic, support your thoughts etc.
Any people here that send money to AI that would care to address my comments is greatly appreciated.
You make good points. I sure don't know the answer. I think one reason we get more attention from groups like AI (and we definitely do) is they are used to us being in a leadership role on humanitarian issues, and the recent past has been a digression from that role. The main lesson of history is that justice can be very slow for the victims. I remember when the Ayatollah Khomeini replaced the Shah in Iran the people complained that the same torturers who had worked for the Shah went to work for the Ayatollah and the situation changed very little for them. History has a lot of examples of that.
Here is something from today's news. It is justice delayed, but will it be justice denied? Groups like AI argue that depends on keeping the torturers in the spotlight long enough for the slow wheels of justice to turn. Many of the victims of torture who were followers of the deposed leader Allende in Chile still await their day in court.
"Killing Fields" lawyers clash over torture jail film (http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20090218/wl_nm/us_cambodia_rouge_9 - broken link)
What are your thoughts? Please, stick to topic, support your thoughts etc.
Any people here that send money to AI that would care to address my comments is greatly appreciated.
We have control over what we do. We do not have control over what Cuba does. Therein lies your answer.
What are your thoughts? Please, stick to topic, support your thoughts etc.
Any people here that send money to AI that would care to address my comments is greatly appreciated.
Huge, fascinating, and interesting subject...where does one even begin? "Relative Standards" is a good way to describe it. It's largely a product of the last 3 to 4 decades...the period in which I came of age (I'm a Viet Nam vet), and is loosely tied in with the huge social upheaval we went through in the 1960's. Anyone who experienced that era can tell you, our whole OUTLOOK changed in the space of one decade.
"Relative Standards" is closely related to "situational ethics", and even, in a way, to 'multiculturalism' (a whole OTHER subject..let's just say I do NOT believe multiculturalism can exist in a free society..since cultures are mutally incompatible, and thus expecting them to co-exist peaceably would require a reduction in freedom).
What ALL these 'philosophies' have in common is a belief that "nothing is absolute; nothing is written in stone; and NO person, and NO religion, and NO culture, has a patent on the definition of 'right' or 'wrong'. Thus, one man's "right" may very well be another man's "wrong"...and since we can't 'judge', we'd have to say they're BOTH correct....and what's 'wrong' for US, may be 'OK' for someone else....and we can't be the judge of that.
All of this, of course, today is deeply affected by 'political correctness', and thus, not only can't we JUDGE each other, it's hostile, elitist, and possibly even racist, to even DISCUSS these differences (as we're doing on this thread now).
Briefly, using the "Guantanamo Bay" example, what goes on there is NOT "OK" for us (the US government) because we're an enlightened, Western, 'liberal', tolerant society. It would be "OK", however, if Guantanamo Bay were being run by the Russians..or the Chinese...or by Pakistan..or even by Cuba..because these places are NOT Western, nor are they 'enlightened', nor liberal, nor tolerant; in other words, these societies "don't KNOW any better", so therefore, they're more-or-less EXPECTED to be abusive, and it's simply 'taken for granted'. We (the US) are NOT expected to be abusive, and when we ARE, it causes shock and outrage....even among US.
It's a HUGE subject. Months ago on the forum, we had a long thread concerning "White Guilt". I offered the opinion that this was a misnomer; that what's often referred to as 'white guilt" does exist, but it would be more properly called "Western, secular, post-Protestant, liberal guilt". It occurs MAINLY in highly developed, affluent nations with Protestant roots, but which have gone on to a basically secular culture. THESE societies (of which the US is one) feel a societal "guilt" for their past transgressions found in no other societies. "White" countries aren't all this way...for example, European catholic nations don't have "white guilt". It isn't JUST the result of a racist, or colonial, past, either...(Spain and France were GREAT colonizers, yet suffer little 'white guilt'...The US and the Scandinavian countries never had overseas 'colonies' or almost none, yet today, they suffer 'white guilt'.)
"White guilt" (again, a misnomer) states that "we" (our country..our society..our 'group') did BAD things in the past to "others"....we killed people, enslaved people, pushed them around....and "we" now bear the guilt for that..and today, we "owe" people...(even people we have NO history with, just "benighted people" in general)...we "owe" them a "break". It's the LEAST we can do for the "guilt" we bear, because we're Modern, enlightened, logical, reasonable people..and we should KNOW how to behave.
As for OTHER places, though? China, Russia, Mexico, most of Africa, the Middle East? Those places have NO concept of "societal guilt", have NO interest in discussing their past abuses, and NO plans to 'make up for them' anytime soon. And THAT'S ALL RIGHT ...Why? ..because these places "Don't know any better..they're not enlightened, their cultures aren't fair, their societies aren't democratic..and they're just not as DEVELOPED as we are..."...therefore, we simply don't hold them to the STANDARDS we hold ourselves too.
Needless to say, the whole issue..of "relative standards", or "differing ethics"..or "western guilt"...or whatever you want to call it, is the WORST kind of "soft bigotry", for in essence it says "We don't expect YOU to behave to the standards we set for OURSELVES..for how COULD you? You're not as advanced as we are, you're more primitive, and you just don't KNOW any better".
I call it "soft racism"...the bigotry of low expectations for those we don't consider 'our equals'. NOBODY is as guilty as WE are, because we're "better people" than they are, and we OUGHT to behave better. Sounds pretty racist to ME....just a little 'nicer' than the old-fashioned kind.
Many great points on this thread already, I will only add the importance of following the money. How much is AI likely to make showcasing the plight of the North Koreans? Or those that have disapeared in countries like Brazil or Columbia? And Cuba -- talk about a narrow venue for potential interestedn donors.
But when the fingerpointing can go to the US (and most especially when it points to W Bush) the money will come pouring in from all corners of the world -- but most especially from N Americans themselves as they want to distance themselves from the moral 'stain' of Guantanamo. Just wait till Hollywood starts making movies about it -- oh, the outrage (and the money) that will pour forth into the coffers of AI and other like organizations.
Many great points on this thread already, I will only add the importance of following the money. How much is AI likely to make showcasing the plight of the North Koreans? Or those that have disapeared in countries like Brazil or Columbia? And Cuba -- talk about a narrow venue for potential interestedn donors.
But when the fingerpointing can go to the US (and most especially when it points to W Bush) the money will come pouring in from all corners of the world -- but most especially from N Americans themselves as they want to distance themselves from the moral 'stain' of Guantanamo. Just wait till Hollywood starts making movies about it -- oh, the outrage (and the money) that will pour forth into the coffers of AI and other like organizations.
Amnesty International USA
North Korea = 4,820 articles
Brazil = 3,250 articles
Columbia = 1,290 articles
Cuba = 4,360 articles
We have control over what we do. We do not have control over what Cuba does. Therein lies your answer.
This goes beyond that as evidenced by my pointing out the studies by Amnesty International holds the US to a vastly different standard. (Likely fundraising again).
Additionally, this references how World Press articles view situations.
Finally, I find it odd that one could say...condemn the Death Penalty in the US but shrug when it is applied in China. Arguably I would think that one's views on human rights should not be swayed or given a pass on because the country is just so "bad" that they can't be held to the same standard.
Ok, this was pretty ironic and is EXACTLY what I'm getting at.
Click on the Cuba link the last 4 articles basically having nothing to do with the nation of Cuba. They have 2 articles about Guantanamo and then a death penalty article which was more about the US.
You have to go back almost a year when they had an article about 75 cuban citizens arrested for dissent (58 still in jail after 5 years). Pretty funny/sad that the Cuban government can arrest and hold so many of their own citizens for 5-6 years and not hear much of a peep out of Amnesty International. (Too busy with Guantanamo I guess)
Ok, lets click on North Korea...wow, about 1 article per year on arguably the worst regime on the planet. ouch. Way to go AI!
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
)
