Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!decvax!tektronix!uw-beaver!cornell!vax135!ariel!houti!hogpc!houxm!ihnp4!ixn5c!inuxc!pur-ee!uiucdcs!uiuccsb!loeb
From: loeb@uiuccsb.UUCP
Newsgroups: net.politics
Subject: Re: KAL 007 and Moral Consistency - (nf)
Message-ID: <2772@uiucdcs.UUCP>
Date: Fri, 9-Sep-83 22:35:44 EDT
Article-I.D.: uiucdcs.2772
Posted: Fri Sep  9 22:35:44 1983
Date-Received: Wed, 14-Sep-83 22:39:17 EDT
Lines: 24

#R:ihuxm:-51400:uiuccsb:11000019:000:1086
uiuccsb!loeb    Sep  9 14:19:00 1983


     Although your information may very well be correct -- I'm not
 sufficiently informed to be a good judge of that -- it seems to miss
 the point.
     To respond to a note that points out biased moralizing (by
 participating in biased moralizing) with equal and opposite
 biased moralizing makes the point of the base note in the very act
 of refuting it.
     We see a great deal more outrage over this KAL incident than
 over the daily U.S, U.S.S.R, and various Rebel inspired deaths
 that are happening every day.  We've become inured to this sort
 of political violence.
     The reason we see so much anger is not the actual deaths, or
 even the deaths of Americans, but the death of American civilians
 as a result of a Russian Missile.  We're ready to run out and take action over
 this incident because it's new -- we haven't come to the terrible
 realization yet that all our puny noises make no difference to
 the giants that are made up of our lives even in the case of
 direct confrontation.
      What's my point?  Moralizing makes no sense in international
 politics.