Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site rti-sel.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!bonnie!akgua!mcnc!rti-sel!wfi
From: wfi@rti-sel.UUCP (William Ingogly)
Newsgroups: net.politics,net.flame
Subject: Re: American Hostages
Message-ID: <361@rti-sel.UUCP>
Date: Tue, 20-Aug-85 17:24:22 EDT
Article-I.D.: rti-sel.361
Posted: Tue Aug 20 17:24:22 1985
Date-Received: Sat, 24-Aug-85 02:59:06 EDT
References: <1042@ihlpg.UUCP> <185@pyuxii.UUCP> <11045@rochester.UUCP> <1399@uwmacc.UUCP> <333@SCIRTP.UUCP> <726@mcnc.mcnc.UUCP>
Reply-To: wfi@rti-sel.UUCP (William Ingogly)
Organization: Research Triangle Institute, NC
Lines: 56
Xref: watmath net.politics:10558 net.flame:11635
Summary: 

In article <726@mcnc.mcnc.UUCP> omo@mcnc.UUCP (Julie Omohundro) writes:

>On Americans in war zones deserving what they get:
>
>I can sort of see your point, but I find this attitude bothersome,
>because it seems to echo statments I heard in the 50s and 60s
>about how blacks who got beaten up for trying to enter all-white
>establishments or segregated schools were getting their just deserts.
>Also statements then and now about women wearing provocative clothing
>or walking alone at night deserving to get raped.

I think the similarity you're commenting on is superficial.

Around 1980, the Communist Workers' Party held a 'Death to the Klan'
rally in Greensboro, North Carolina. In case you hadn't heard, North
Carolina is the heart of Klan Country. As I recall, members of the CWP
issued challenges to the Klan to confront them at the rally (I'm sure
if I'm wrong 800 people will correct me :-). Now, calling for an end
to the Klan's involvement in North Carolina society may be a political
action that's admirable. But holding a 'Death to the Klan' rally in
Greensboro is a clear call for violent confrontation and/or martyrdom
(I'd also like to point out that at least some CWP members were armed
and returned Klan fire).

No one deserves to be shot for expressing his/her political opinions,
but in the Greensboro case it's pretty clear (at least to me) that
anyone who's surprised at the results of this march is either naive or
an opportunist. Is there a qualitative difference between the
Greensboro situation and the civil rights situations you cited in your
posting? It seems to me the answer is yes, and the difference is one
of intent. The CWP people deliberately placed themselves in a
situation where it was highly likely that (a) the Klan would make an
appearance and (b) there would be an exchange of gunfire. They may not
have 'deserved what they got,' but the likelihood of something
unfortunate happening in that situation was high.

The case of the Christians visiting Nicaragua seems similar to me (and
I'm sure to many other people) because these people were knowingly
placing themselves in a situation where something Bad would probably
happen. Recall, for example, that Eden Pastora threatened them with
bodily harm. If we assume these people were rational about their
actions we have to assume they knew they were probably in for a
violent confrontation and possibly martyrdom. We KNOW what the contras
are capable of; how many people haven't seen the film of the
Sandinista's throat being cut while he lay in the grave he dug for
himself? Anyone on the left who weeps and moans for the 'poor
Christians' captured by the contras is either politically naive or an
opportunist who's trying to milk the situation for all it's worth.
They may not have gotten what they 'deserved,' but they certainly got
what they asked for.

Righteous indignation seems an appropriate response to me only when
the victim is an unwilling victim. I find it hard to get worked up
about 'martyrs' who are deliberately staging a media event.

                             -- Bill Ingogly