Eff's Rambles (Archive)



Making bad comparisons.

Hitler and Bush are not the same person. Similarites do not make people mirrors of each other, nor the virtual reincanations of others. One might be able to argue Bush is evil, but no amount of supposed, even proven, similarities can show that people are the same when one of them does not share the same belief as the other, and has not been reviewed with the benefit of the hindsight of history. Without such context, one is engaging in broad, possiby, theorizing; it's often harder to prove the intent and psychology behind an action when said action is still being implemented. But one can find reasons for an action, however the intent is hard to prove. Hitler was a bigot, racist mass murderer. Bush is not, save for, depending on your opinion, the last part.

Also, no matter how innocently intend, any comparison to Hitler is offensive to many. One might find it interesting, and it might be, perhaps enlightening, but it shouldn't be surpising that some, perhaps most people find it appalling.

Long and Short of Something.

Two kinds of interpretations and subsequent resolutions in response to an event are those that might be more useful for the long term prevention of the occurence of a like event, and those that might be more useful for preventing events which are theorised, like those events that might recur in the long term, to occur, but, however, in the short term.

It's possible that the continuation and exacerbation of a policy which might be the whole or partial reason for the occurence of the first event might make recurrences of like events more probable. But it's also possible that that policy might be the only viable method for stopping the occurence of short term events which might be arguably more probable, if it is the case that evidence exists more strongly in its favor than for the theoretical one that believes said policy to be the reason for the perpetration of the first event, and one might presume other events committed by the same perpetrators, or others responding in like manner, for as yet undertiminable reasons, to the original perpetrators.

The continuation of a policy that might be responsible for an event might make recurrences of similar events, or the likelihood thereof, virtually perpetual. But the necessity of the policy, if cessation is not seen as viable, might override long term consequential considerations and subsequent resolutions to that end. The precedent made by an event might make it necessary to continue with the same policy, or use a new one, which might not comply with the needs of the long term perspective.


Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home


Online dictionary at www.Answers.com

Concise information in one click