Ask not...

[Barclay (Dark Angel)]

I've been thinking about JFK's inaugural address on becoming President of the USA in 1961, and I quote...

"And so, my fellow Americans, ask not what your country can do for you; ask what you can do for your country."

It seems to me that philosophy's a recipe for despotism. Did US grunts fight for their country in Vietnam? Were they even fighting for an ideology? I don't think so. I think they fought for themselves, and each other. And there's the rub. When people fight they do so for themselves, their loved ones and families, and for their friends and fellow human beings. They don't fight for some abstract entity, government, or even a country (other than they think they "own" part of it).

But it goes even further than that. Surely it ought to be fundamental that any government is there to serve the people, and not the other way round. And if you're here to serve a country - whose country - and who decides? Even countries where the govt is democratically elected virtually always have minority govts. That is the winning party gets less then 50% of the registered voters (rather than 50% of the electorate that actually voted).

Then add in corruption, money, vested interest, power trips, evangelism, ambition and ego, and I'm left thinking, "what makes then think they know better than me".

So, no. I think I'll continue following my own standards and my own morality.

And for a kicker in the tail of this post, JFK also said this in the very same inaugural address :-

"To those new states whom we welcome to the ranks of the free, we pledge our word that one form of colonial control shall not have passed away merely to be replaced by a far more iron tyranny."

And :-

"To our sister republics south of our border, we offer a special pledge: to convert our good words into good deeds, in a new alliance for progress, to assist free men and free governments in casting off the chains of poverty."

It does indeed appear that serving ones own country is something entirely different from the sentiment behind the rhetoric...

Hugs,

Barclay

 

[Bacchanal]

soldiers (cue better response from mickey..) rarely are fighting specifically for an ideology/concept of nation or whatever, but more because their commanders have placed them in a situation in which their lives are at risk

perhaps the sentiment is more a challenge to self-serving american attitudes that expect zero input and maximum output from society in their favour... in this respect I find it a most praiseworthy idea

however corrupt/unrepresentative/inappropriate government may be we should be seeking to improve society ourselves, not simply waiting to pick the fruit


"To our sister republics south of our border, we offer a special pledge: to convert our good words into good deeds, in a new alliance for progress, to assist free men and free governments in casting off the chains of poverty."
=absurd
US intervention has been one of the major causes of instability and social disparity in south/central america
remember El Salvador

 

[boinktastik]

I think that the ideology/concept of a nation that a person signs up to join the army is often vastly different from that for which they end up fighting for.

from some of the soldiers that i have talked to who signed up to fight for specific causes it appears that they often sign up to fight for and protect an ideaology/ concept of a nation but this sense of duty rapidly dissolves as soon as they start getting shot at where upon their aim is to keep themselves and their friends in one piece.

I met a nice californian called rick a couple of years ago at samothraki who was studying psychology at Stamford when Vietmam started and so signed up. when he arrived his "search and destroy" missions rapidly turned into "search and avoid"

it seems to me that the wealthy ruling class of america feels that they are doing thier duty by making massive profits and (sometimes) paying their taxes. they leave it to the indoctrinated youth and poor latino migrants, desperate to get a passport, to put their lives on the line to ensure that the gravy train keeps running.

as for :
"To our sister republics south of our border, we offer a special pledge: to convert our good words into good deeds, in a new alliance for progress, to assist free men and free governments in casting off the chains of poverty."
it makes me sick.

good words into good deeds huh?

why then did you tie into the free trade agreement with guatemala a $100 million loan to fund the purchase of US military equipment?

someone has got to forge those chains of poverty, if we dont do it someone else will