From: utzoo!decvax!ucbvax!poli-sci Newsgroups: fa.poli-sci Title: Poli-Sci Digest V2 #136 Article-I.D.: ucbvax.7384 Posted: Tue May 25 12:54:22 1982 Received: Sat May 29 01:43:33 1982 >From JoSH@RUTGERS Tue May 25 12:40:48 1982 Poli-Sci Digest Tue 25 May 82 Volume 2 Number 136 Contents: Shades of ... Leftists Agonistes (3 msgs) Argumentation Atom Bombs (2 msgs) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: 23 May 1982 16:46:01-PDT From: allegra!phr at Berkeley Subject: Moral Majority giving morality a bad name? I heard on the radio that Jerry Falwell's book, now titled "Wake Up, America" or some such drivel, was originally going to be called "My Struggle" (which has already been used). How can this be substantiated, if it's true? ------------------------------ Date: 21 May 1982 2154-EDT (Friday) From: Hank Walker at CMU-10A Subject: loyalty checks in the Agriculture dept. Today's NYT has a story that says that Secretary Block just found out about the whole thing due to the uproar among the scientists who were subject to the loyalty test. He disavowed the whole thing, and they were supposedly looking for the high official whose idea it was in the first place. ------------------------------ Date: 22 May 1982 03:19-EDT From: James A. CoxDate: 20 May 1982 12:11-EDT From: Bern Niamir [Message from me about how much better individual rights fare in this country than in most of the rest of the world. - Jim Cox] If the rest of the world thrives on dictatorship and repression, do we have to condone it at home? This market mentality (we have the better product, you have to buy it though you are being ripped off) is utterly inexcusable when it comes to human rights. And the rest of the world includes France, Scandinavia, etc. which we stil have a long way to go to just catch up. I never advocated condoning dictatorship or repression either at home or abroad. I simply pointed out that, in considering the state of individual freedom here, we should keep in mind the state of the rest of the world. It is terribly easy, after dwelling on the many problems in this country, to lose one's perspective (see my comments below). As for France's supposed superiority in freedom to this country, apparently you have never seen any French television news broadcasts. If you had, you would realize that "freedom of the press," at least in television, is not at all the same thing there as it is here. Under President Giscard d'Estaing, state-owned French television was little more than a mouthpiece for the government. Mr. Mitterrand has done little better. And property rights, the most basic of freedoms, have been much-abused by the Socialists' ambitious nationalization program. Not only the institutions are imperfect, they are structurally wrong. If I write an operating system in BASIC and it falters (which it will), should I attribute the failure to bugs in the code or the wrong choice of programming language? Here I think we have an example of someone who has lost his perspective. Apparently because of what he sees as endemic repression in our system, Bern Niamir has concluded that our institutions are "structurally wrong." Why don't you take a look around the world, Mr. Niamir? I think you'll find, to paraphrase Winston Churchill, that our (western) institutions are the worst possible ones, except for all the others. You started saying that conservatives were harassed by the government. I did? Where did you get that? Now you are apologizing for its systematic harrassment of leftists and others with unpopular beliefs. This second position is much closer to reality. I am not apologizing. While it is true that many groups, left and right, have been harrassed by the government, these cases are \not/ that widespread. Even if the government has been guilty of all the harassment claimed by some people on this list, the groups that have been harassed constitute a small minority of all such political groups. And in most cases, even those who have been harassed have eventually found satisfaction either through the courts or through more enlightened legislative or executive officials. ------------------------------ Date: 24 May 1982 0547-PDT From: Jim McGrath Subject: left/right People who think that the KKK and the Nazi party have NOT been harassed by the FBI, local police, etc... are off their rockers. Or don't they remember the civil rights movements of the 50's and 60's (which they seem to recall in other contexts)? The occupation of towns and whole COUNTIES by national guard units from out of state? Massive infiltration by the FBI of the KKK, leading to mass trials (some leading in turn to convictions, others not - until they were moved out of the south so that a jury of "peers" could bring in the government demanded verdict). I personally find the KKK and Nazi party detestable, but that does not cloud my mine to the fact that they have been persecuted by the government (usually the national government) quite a bit. Perhaps people are ignoring this because they agree with the results of the persecution? If that's the case, then you've made your bed.... better stay in it when the FBI comes charging in to disrupt your latest leftist meeting or event. Jim ------------------------------ Date: 22 May 1982 1342-EDT From: Tim Subject: Argumentation Date: 21 May 1982 04:58-EDT From: David A. Levitt Subject: Dishonest arguments I distinguish "arguing to win" from "arguing to teach and learn", and I try to restrict my own discussions to the latter. I think it is clear to the most casual reader that the vast majority of letters published in this digest are "arguments to win". (If your own letters have been exceptions, you neednt take this personally.) Since all the complaints that have previously been made about this tendency have gone ignored, I suspect there is little anyone can do to change it. Personally, I continue reading this list because, in the midst of all the flaming, occasionally some reasonable facts and opinions get presented. Occasionally... Twinerik ------------------------------ Date: 22 May 1982 1913-EDT From: Bill Hofmann Subject: Atomic Cafe Atomic Cafe is a collection of post-WWII propaganda-type films about atomic weapons, the Soviet threat and civil defense (Duck and Cover!). It just opened in Boston at the Sack Beacon Hill (next to Govt Center). It's fun and interesting, and I'd recommend that you see it if you have the chance. -Bill ------------------------------ Date: 24 May 1982 0608-PDT From: Jim McGrath Subject: H & N Atom bomb attacks The US was committed to a strategy of total and complete conquest of the Axis powers (for a variety of reasons - all of them understandable and most reasonable). We did NOT have any choice but to invade or drop an atomic bomb, hope for the best, and THEN probably invade. Remember, in retaking some rather small islands, defended by a few tens of thousands of troops who were totally isolated, in territory not remotely considered to be ones homeland, we paid a horrible price (Iwo Jima, a scant eight square miles in area, cost the US 24,891 casualties; Owkinawa cost us over 49,000 casualties). It is perfectly believable that invading Japan itself could cost us a million men - the damage to the islands itself would make Japan look like a butcher shop. Instead, we droped two bombs that cost Japan less than 10% of the projected MILITARY (not civilian) casualties for them if we had invaded. The Japanese might have been cowered by a weapon that enabled us to destroy a city with one plane instead of hundreds (remember Dreszen (sp?)), but they may not have. Indeed, the peace party had a HELL of a hard time driving out the hawks even WITH 2 atom bomb attacks on major cities. Quite frankly, the Japanese displayed a tremendous amount of pride and stubbornness during the war - and no one appreciated that better than the US military which suffered for it. No one was going to make the potentially diasterous mistake of underestimating the capacity of Japan to resist an invasion - not with MILLIONS of lives in the balance. Atom bombing Japan was not a nice thing to do - but war is not nice. It was the correct decision, saved millions of lives, and was, quite frankly, cheap at the price. Jim ------------------------------ End of POLI-SCI Digest - 30 - -------