The Means Are The Ends

Printable View

12-27-2005, 05:50 PM
starrwriter

The Means Are The Ends

There is a line at the end of the film "Casablanca" that was meant to inspire the nobility of self-sacrifice in the war against fascism, but it rings hollow to me in hindsight.

Playing reformed nightclub owner Rick, Humphrey Bogart says: "The problems of three little people don't amount to a hill of beans in this crazy world."

Sorry, Rick, but the problems of ordinary people are exactly what matters most in politics. Political reformers who ignore this truth become part of the problem rather than part of the solution. They think noble ends justify any means, but the wisest political insight I ever read was this: there are no ends, only means. Ends are utopian dreams. Means are the realities ordinary people have to live with every day of their lives.

Until our leaders learn this lesson, we will continue to be at the mercy of dire means for a "greater good" that may never happen.
12-31-2005, 04:54 AM
Outlander

That is perhaps the most unselfish thing I've seen you say.

Wow, your not soulless afterall.

Quick! insult me before my opinion of you is changed.
12-31-2005, 10:18 AM
Virgil

Quote:

Originally Posted by starrwriter

There is a line at the end of the film "Casablanca" that was meant to inspire the nobility of self-sacrifice in the war against fascism, but it rings hollow to me in hindsight.

Playing reformed nightclub owner Rick, Humphrey Bogart says: "The problems of three little people don't amount to a hill of beans in this crazy world."

Sorry, Rick, but the problems of ordinary people are exactly what matters most in politics. Political reformers who ignore this truth become part of the problem rather than part of the solution. They think noble ends justify any means, but the wisest political insight I ever read was this: there are no ends, only means. Ends are utopian dreams. Means are the realities ordinary people have to live with every day of their lives.

Until our leaders learn this lesson, we will continue to be at the mercy of dire means for a "greater good" that may never happen.

Under normal circumstances, I whole heartedly agree with you. I like this: "Therre are no ends, only means." Fairly profound actually. But given that a world war was going on, wouldn't you think that there are priorities to tackle. I know the actual line doesn't say that, but one has to put it in context.
12-31-2005, 01:46 PM
starrwriter

Quote:

Originally Posted by Virgil

Under normal circumstances, I whole heartedly agree with you. I like this: "There are no ends, only means." Fairly profound actually. But given that a world war was going on, wouldn't you think that there are priorities to tackle. I know the actual line doesn't say that, but one has to put it in context.

If political leaders practiced the philosophy of "no ends, only means," there wouldn't be any world wars.

BTW, the quote comes from "The Best Man," a film about a fictional presidential campaign in the U.S.
12-31-2005, 01:53 PM
starrwriter

Quote:

Originally Posted by Outlander

That is perhaps the most unselfish thing I've seen you say. Wow, your not soulless after all. Quick! insult me before my opinion of you is changed.

It's not unselfish at all. I don't want to suffer from the grim realities of political leaders who advocate "noble" goals while leading us to hell. The road there is paved with good intentions, as everyone should know.

I don't have to insult you. You're doing fine all by yourself.
12-31-2005, 01:55 PM
Virgil

Quote:

Originally Posted by starrwriter

If political leaders practiced the philosophy of "no ends, only means," there wouldn't be any world wars.

Well, it takes two to tango. Hitler and the emperor of Japan had other thoughts. Covering your eyes in isolation is not the answer. What would you have wanted to have done after we were bombed at Pearl Harbor? Turn the other cheek? In fact, for at least a decade before we entered the war, we were covering our eyes in isolation.
12-31-2005, 02:11 PM
starrwriter

Quote:

Originally Posted by Virgil

Well, it takes two to tango. Hitler and the emperor of Japan had other thoughts. Covering your eyes in isolation is not the answer. What would you have wanted to have done after we were bombed at Pearl Harbor? Turn the other cheek? In fact, for at least a decade before we entered the war, we were covering our eyes in isolation.

Fifty million people died in World War II, the bloodiest war in human history. Anything that could have been done to avoid that scale of death would have been worth it.

For instance, the Japanese wouldn't have bombed Pearl Harbor if we hadn't blockaded the oil supply they depended on to survive as an industrial nation. The blockade was an act of war which the U.S. "prepared" for by placing our whole Pacific fleet in one port.

Also, if France, England and the U.S. had enforced the provisions of the Versaille Treaty, Nazi Germany wouldn't have had a huge military to launch the European war.
12-31-2005, 02:17 PM
Virgil

Quote:

Originally Posted by starrwriter

For instance, the Japanese wouldn't have bombed Pearl Harbor if we hadn't blockaded the oil supply they depended on to survive as an industrial nation. The blockade was an act of war which the U.S. "prepared" for by placing our whole Pacific fleet in one port.

You mean the oil they were using to rape, pillage, and imperialize China and rest of the far east?

Quote:

Also, if France, England and the U.S. had enforced the provisions of the Versaille Treaty, Nazi Germany wouldn't have had a huge military to launch the European war.

Hindsight is 20/20. Obviously they made mistakes. But how could you have predicted? Look, there is no utopia. Humanity has always had wars, and I'm afraid always will.
12-31-2005, 02:23 PM
Outlander

Thats Better, you are as I thought.
12-31-2005, 02:40 PM
starrwriter

Quote:

Originally Posted by Virgil

You mean the oil they were using to rape, pillage, and imperialize China and rest of the far east?

England imperialized the far east and hooked the Chinese on opium to make a profit, but the U.S. didn't start a war with the Brits over this.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Virgil

...Humanity has always had wars, and I'm afraid always will.

As long as people think that, you're right.
12-31-2005, 03:54 PM
Virgil

Quote:

Originally Posted by starrwriter

As long as people think that, you're right.

Normally Star, you're not the utopian. I've thought of you as pretty realistic. You probably think that crime can someday be extirpated. In chess, it's you move, then my move, then you have to react to my move. You're not completely free in a decision. The other person's move circumscribes your next move. Even on your paradise island. In life, that's compounded by billions of people making billions of moves, all reacting and counter-reacting. Would you ignore someone who punched you in face for your wallet? Even if the majority of us decided to lead passivist, Christ-like lives, there would be someone to take advantage. Can you name a fifty year period in history where there was no war?
12-31-2005, 04:22 PM
starrwriter

Quote:

Originally Posted by Virgil

Normally Star, you're not the utopian. I've thought of you as pretty realistic. You probably think that crime can someday be extirpated. In chess, it's you move, then my move, then you have to react to my move. You're not completely free in a decision. The other person's move circumscribes your next move. Even on your paradise island. In life, that's compounded by billions of people making billions of moves, all reacting and counter-reacting. Would you ignore someone who punched you in face for your wallet? Even if the majority of us decided to lead passivist, Christ-like lives, there would be someone to take advantage.

I don't think it's utopian or pacifist to look for ways to avoid the organized slaughter of millions of people.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Virgil

Can you name a fifty year period in history where there was no war?

Yes, I can. For 98% of human history when people lived in cooperative bands of hunter-gatherers, no wars were ever waged. War has only happened during the past few thousand years of "civilization."
12-31-2005, 04:30 PM
Virgil

Quote:

Originally Posted by starrwriter

I
Yes, I can. For 98% of human history when people lived in cooperative bands of hunter-gatherers, no wars were ever waged. War has only happened during the past few thousand years of "civilization."

Hahahaha. You can't be serious? Are you unaware of the bashed skulls unearthed in these hunter-gather archeaological sites? What you're talking about is the illusion of a "noble savage." There has never been in reality a noble savage. It was generated by people (early Romantics, from which the novel Frankenstein was a outgrowth) who projected their idealism into a era of humanity which was unkown to them. Modern archeaologists have shown that early human life was not at all ideal.
12-31-2005, 05:15 PM
starrwriter

Quote:

Originally Posted by Virgil

Hahahaha. You can't be serious? Are you unaware of the bashed skulls unearthed in these hunter-gather archeaological sites? What you're talking about is the illusion of a "noble savage." There has never been in reality a noble savage. It was generated by people (early Romantics, from which the novel Frankenstein was a outgrowth) who projected their idealism into a era of humanity which was unkown to them. Modern archeaologists have shown that early human life was not at all ideal.

I have a degree in anthropology. You have the timeline screwed up. Bashed skulls were found in early "civilizations," not in the remains of hunter-gatherer societies.

And hunter-gatherers were not savages. They took care of each other and the environment they lived in. We are the savages who kill each other and systematically destroy the ecosystem.
12-31-2005, 05:47 PM
Virgil

If you say so. My brother is an anthropolgist, I'll have to remember to ask him. Still strikes me as utopian.
01-02-2006, 05:18 PM
Countess

Did someone say Casanova? Heath Ledger?

Oh Casablanca. Nevermind.

I have Ledger on the brain, and Gyllenhaal. When will Bareback Mountain come to my town? It's so unfair!
01-02-2006, 05:41 PM
starrwriter

Quote:

Originally Posted by Countess

When will Bareback Mountain come to my town? It's so unfair!

How did I know you were pining to see that film? You're a trip, Countess.

PS: I just noticed you said Bareback Mountain instead of Brokeback Mountain. Was that a double entendre/Freudian slip? (Freud didn't wear slips outside of his bedroom.)
01-02-2006, 06:21 PM
Countess

Quote:

Originally Posted by starrwriter

How did I know you were pining to see that film? You're a trip, Countess.

PS: I just noticed you said Bareback Mountain instead of Brokeback Mountain. Was that a double entendre/Freudian slip? (Freud didn't wear slips outside of his bedroom.)

You caught me. I never make Freudian slips when I can work intentional puns. (--:

Jules...I mean, Countess