Earth Calling, Come In Please

In response to our post below, copithorne left the following comment.

America started a war in Iraq for an ideology.

You are saying that ideologies of this nature have their roots in inadequate parenting. Parents value ideologies above their children. Or, children value ideologies above their parents. The answer for this is more human contact so that people will value human relationships more and will be less likely to start wars.

People start wars when they are engaging in projection -- locating their disowned qualities in someone else and then attacking them as an enemy. This is the activity of Al Qaeda and Republicans. This article is an example of this projection. The bad qualities are all over there, in the enemy. There is no self awareness about one's own behavior and actions. In fact, the act of seeing the bad qualities in the other is an essential step in protecting the fragile self-system from self awareness of the conflicted qualities within oneself.

What makes the self-system fragile is bad parenting.

Good parenting would help people tolerate good and bad aspects within themselves so that they can stop projecting onto others. The struggle with an external enemy can become a struggle for character and integrity.

You ask how American non involvement in Iraq would stem the tide of Islamic radicalism. I don't understand how that question is coherent or relevant. Not starting a war would spare thousands of lives and billions of dollars. So one answer might be that spending billions of dollars building peace and democracy in the middle east would stem the tide of Islamic radicalism.

But again, the question is expressed in a context of projection in which radicalism is something that exists over there in the enemy and not within oneself and one's own behavior.

The article you write is about how good parenting is a foundation that protects against radicalism. The true implications of the article are tested when we apply it to ourselves as well.

If we had better parenting in this country would we be less likely to start wars? In many ways the answer has to be yes, but in other ways it is different because our manner of war is more abstract and commercialized than suicide terrorism.

This is a lovely comment, devoid of any connection to our current realities.

It is indisputable that the war in Iraq had little, if anything, to do with terror. Terror in the Middle East and North Africa, existed long before US policy either ignored or engaged in regional politics. Some of the worst and most egregious examples of terror are found in countries that have nothing to do with US foreign policy.

To imply that US policy has a deleterious effect on the current state of affairs is to be either deliberately deceitful or to be utterly uninformed on matters pertaining to the region. Further, to attempt in some way, via pretzel like intellectual gymnastics that our own foreign policy or ideology is responsible for the situation we find ourselves in, is utterly ridiculous.

Our foreign policy is predicated on our needs. That is the first job of government, to take care of our collective needs. This applies to governments of any administration. The purpose of any government policy is to fulfill the obligation that the government has to it's citizens- to look out after our needs first.

Our foreign policy is successful because our society and culture are superior to other societies and cultures. It’s that simple. Societies and culture can be measured. They are not all equal. Nazi Germany and Mayan tribes that celebrated human sacrifice, were not our equivalent, in any way, shape or form. The same can be said for any other culture or society. Any free society is superior than any other society. Free societies that defend freedom or encourage freedom are superior to those free societies that don't. Societies are measured by what they contribute, not by what they destroy. Period.

"America started a war in Iraq for an ideology."

Very true- that ideology is called freedom.

"People start wars when they are engaging in projection -- locating their disowned qualities in someone else and then attacking them as an enemy. This is the activity of Al Qaeda and Republicans."

This is close to the stupidist thing I've ever heard. Are you seriously comparing Republicans to Al Qaeda? Seriously? Tempting as it is to relegate you to the idiot bin, we have decided to ask you for any actual evidence you might have.

You ask how American non involvement in Iraq would stem the tide of Islamic radicalism. I don't understand how that question is coherent or relevant. Not starting a war would spare thousands of lives and billions of dollars. So one answer might be that spending billions of dollars building peace and democracy in the middle east would stem the tide of Islamic radicalism.

Are you saying that we should have given Saddam (and every other murdering butcher and corrupt thief) billions of dollars in the hope that he would have instituted a democratic government? And are so uninformed as to believe that simply throwing money at a problem will fix the problem? When has that ever worked? Was Bill Clinton wrong when he too, advocated the elimination of Saddam?

The article you write is about how good parenting is a foundation that protects against radicalism. The true implications of the article are tested when we apply it to ourselves as well.

If we had better parenting in this country would we be less likely to start wars? In many ways the answer has to be yes, but in other ways it is different because our manner of war is more abstract and commercialized than suicide terrorism.

Are you seriously comparing parents that celebrate the slaugter their children impose are our moral equivalents? Are you implying that the cultural environment that produces suicide bombers are is equivalent to our own?

What the hell is wrong with you?