Skip to main content

View Diary: The Ethic of (Ir)Responsibility (238 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  In an exchange long ago and far away (none)
    ... (in the course of which Nader ultimately suffered a spluttering meltdown and left the arena) I reflected:
    Are we responsible for the reasonably knowable consequences of our discretionary acts? Yes, except in systems of pure fatalism or pure proceduralism. May immediate harm be outweighed by more compelling considerations (such as the opportunity to provoke a crisis--sacrificing a generation of pawns--to create the preconditions for revolutionary change)? In theory, yes, but at great risk.
    •  Nader got the better of you RonK (none)
      RonK unmasks his empty rhetoric with his conclusions: "and you know what's good for us, better than we do ... right, Ralph?" That's just what you spent e-mail time doing. What I do is urge others to advance justice as citizens in the arena of deliberative democracy. Always looking for better ways to make cars safer, air cleaner, water purer, corporations more accountable, government more accountable, and have the future a little more foreseeable--all within democratic processes.

      Someday a book may be written showing a correlation between the quality of communications and their ease of transmission. Letters written years ago between politicians, for example, were much more thoughtful than in recent years because they were rarer events and took longer to get there. E-mail is at the other extreme, quick, cheap, and too often thoughtless. RonK can be advised to think a little more before his fingers fly on the keyboard. For this, he should read a sobering new book, titled Silent Theft, by David Bollier, about our society's commons or commonwealth and how corporations are appropriating it installment by installment. He will receive valuable information about commonwealth that will give thoughtfulness a chance to ponder how a society protects its common assets (public airwaves, public research and development, public lands, public works, and public space).

      free the information

      by freelixir on Fri Feb 27, 2004 at 06:55:11 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Then why did he run away? (none)
        •  He Didn't Run Away (none)
          You said something, he made a response, and you made a short rebuttal.  Is he required to return to respond to that, and then when you make another rebuttal, be required again to come back for a rebuttal, and so on?

          I'm sure Nader is a busy man.

          If anyone is on an ego trip, it's the guy who's claiming Ralph "ran away" since he didn't respond to a rebuttal.

          Ralph made his points, you made yours, and both were made with vigor.

          To be honest, I don't think Ralph needed to say much more than he did.  You could always write him a letter.  He seemed to leave that out as the preferable form of communication with him.

          free the information

          by freelixir on Fri Feb 27, 2004 at 07:19:09 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  An Example (none)
            I'm sure at some point I will tear myself away from DKos and actually start my software rollout again.  Then, I will be away for hours if not days from commenting on blog threads, and will likely not return to old arguments when I return, but wade into the current ones.

            In the meantime, or even a few minutes after my last post, if someone makes a good rebuttal, and I don't respond, does that mean I "ran away", or that I just "went away".

            Like Ralph said, stop being a mind reader RonK.  It discredits you, and, in my opinion, is a reflection of an overactive ego.

            free the information

            by freelixir on Fri Feb 27, 2004 at 07:22:35 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site