You're like Elizabeth and I'm Mr. Darcy

Jun 03, 2006 13:13

"i check my answering machine nine times every day and i can't sleep at night because i feel that there is so much to do and fix and change in the world and i wonder every day if i am making a difference and if i will ever express the greatness within me or if i will remain forever paralyzed by muddled madness inside my head. i've wept on every ( Read more... )

Leave a comment

Comments 16

gemarina June 4 2006, 01:53:32 UTC
"Elie Wiesel came at Stanford"
*giggles*

He was on Oprah the other day and he went to Auschwitz with Oprah and I really liked his voice when he was murmuring his deep comments to her. Is that superficial? I'm very superficial these days...

My only non-superficial thought during the show was that it would be really awesome if when they were naming all the recent genocides they called the Israel efforts to erradicate the Palestinians a genocide... it would have totally made me laugh for hours at how completely shocked the world would be.

I think that you are happy that you won't ever have an idea of "should." You think that everything is relative and absolutes are just silly, yes? I think that sometimes.

And I am very glad that you are loving life so much. The god-that-totally-exists would be proud that you enjoy his creation so much.

Reply

cielwalker June 4 2006, 03:24:22 UTC
:: blushes :: I changed spoke at to came because I really wanted to write that he "spoke" those words in the next sentence. Thus, ummm, prepositions are clearly important?

I liked his voice, too, because it surprised me to remember that he was German. And calling the Israel situation a genocide would traumatize everyone alive right now. I couldn't pinpoint what was wrong with the idea, but I gave up after a while and decided that marginalization isn't elimination.

I don't know how I feel about absolutes. That's mostly what leads me to think that I don't believe in them.

Let's enjoy life together over the summer. I get home in two weeks. Then we can have conversations more than once a month. :)

Reply

gemarina June 4 2006, 17:50:51 UTC
The date of your return has been gleefully noted.

Reply


marchissa6 June 4 2006, 09:01:43 UTC
I have to disagree with you a little bit here :) I actually find Elie Weisel's quote about the opposite of love being indifference to be very powerful. It has nothing to do with being unquestionably certain about what is right and wrong, but quite the opposite: it's about committing yourself to constantly evaluate your society and the world around you i.e. to care about humanity and its destiny rather than to dismiss all ethical scrutiny perhaps because of the idea that truth is too relative to know. I also disagree with the idea that truth or ethics are relative. What I have grown to believe is that values of liberty, justice, and human rights are universal goods, not a mere expression of cultural norms. Nor do their justification stem from any faith in a deity. Rather, they are based on the idea that existence has meaning when we give it meaning, and show concern for the fulfillment and thriving of basic human needs and human dignity. Take a course on existentialism or "ethics and public policy," they might change your perspective.

Reply

marchissa6 June 4 2006, 10:09:43 UTC
oh, and there's a lot I could say regarding your friend's comment on Israel, but I don't want to start a political debate. I'd be happy to talk to you personally about my thoughts. I'll say just this much: it's really dangerous to abuse the word, "genocide." It refers to the systemic and deliberate mass killing of particular groups of people. When "genocide" is used outside of that specific context, it has the effect of hyping up harms in order to solidify unquestioned opposition to a perceived injustice while glossing over complex and meaningful ethical scrutiny regarding the justice of actions or actors.

Reply

gemarina June 4 2006, 17:49:45 UTC
I don't really think it is a bonafide genocide... But I'd just taken a class relative to the conflict and my teacher definitely implied that military action (Plan D especially) was very much ethnic cleansing, to get population numbers where Israel wanted them... and it would have been explosive if he'd been running the show. I didn't mean to offend with my desire to be so amused.

Reply

marchissa6 June 5 2006, 01:42:56 UTC
I'm curtailing my impulse to write a five page long response to this, especially since I understand that the comment was supposed to be light-hearted. But, as truth is important to me, I'll just say this much regarding plan D of 1948: Whatever its ethical shortcomings, it was not "ethnic cleansing." I'm sorry that you had a teacher who taught the conflict misusing such terminology for this particular israeli action. Mideastweb.org writes about Plan D:
"It was not a plan for mass expulsion or 'ethnic cleansing' of Palestinians from wide areas
* It was not an offensive plan-- it was meant to be activated only in the event of an attack initiated by the Arab side, though that attack was thought to be inevitable.
* It did not call for massacres such as the massacre perpetrated at Deir Yassin by the dissident Irgun and Lehi forces.
* It was not an 'expansionist' plan: 'Generally, the aim of this plan is not an operation of occupation outside the borders of the Hebrew state.'"

Reply


mrcostanza June 4 2006, 09:20:50 UTC
I want to respond to what both you and Marissa have said, but it's 4:20 in the morning and I'm not really thinking totally clearly. Please remind me in a couple of days if I still haven't said anything at that point. :)

Reply


iwanttoreadurlj June 4 2006, 10:58:20 UTC
it has been an eventful year. and day, in fact. less than three.

Reply


flyingelmo June 6 2006, 10:39:13 UTC
I love it when you mention Stanford people by name. Almost as much as I love you. And this would have been far cooler as a facebook post.

Reply


Leave a comment

Up