Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: $Revision: 1.6.2.16 $; site inmet.UUCP Path: utzoo!lsuc!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxr!mhuxn!ihnp4!qantel!lll-crg!gymble!umcp-cs!seismo!harvard!bbnccv!inmet!janw From: janw@inmet.UUCP Newsgroups: net.politics Subject: Re: Re: Re: Orphaned Response (US aid to Message-ID: <7800868@inmet.UUCP> Date: Tue, 3-Dec-85 21:08:00 EST Article-I.D.: inmet.7800868 Posted: Tue Dec 3 21:08:00 1985 Date-Received: Mon, 9-Dec-85 20:51:03 EST References: <684@spar.UUCP> Lines: 83 Nf-ID: #R:spar:-68400:inmet:7800868:000:4107 Nf-From: inmet!janw Dec 3 21:08:00 1985 >[baba@spar] >> >> Having sold the Nicaraguan people down the river with its aid to >> >> the Sandinistas, the US has an OBLIGATION to at least match that >> >> with aid to the resistance. [janw@inmet] >> >> >At the time that the aid was offered, there were still significant democratic >> >and nationalist factions within the Sandinista directorate. Offering aid >> >in an attempt to strengthen their position was both morally and realistically >> >a reasonable thing to do. I fail to see how doing so "sold the Nicaraguan >> >people down the river", when the Sandinistas were already in power and >> >indeed were at the peak of their popularity. >> >> I have no doubt it was an honest mistake. Therefore, "sold down >> the river" is a harsh expression. This was a one-liner in >> response to some flaming rhetoric, not a dissertation. >I don't understand. Is there some reason why one-liners need to contain >less truth than other observations? I think the word you want is >"slogan", not "one-liner". Of course there is a reason. They contain less truth because they are shorter: less truth fits in. In this case the basically true assertion was not cushioned with qualifications. Just think how many qualifications are missing in "Columbus discovered America". What he discovered was not called America; other people discovered it with him; other people (the Vikings) had discovered it before; still others just lived there; and he himself never recognized that any new land was discovered. Still, as a one-liner, "Columbus discovered America" will do: Por Castilla y por Leon Nuevo mundo hallo Colon ! Now about slogans: A one-liner can make a good slogan, and still be true. E.g. : "Power tends to corrupt; absolute power corrupts absolutely" (Lord Acton). Or: "The government is best that governs least" (Thomas Jefferson). Or: "Probability theory is common sense verified by calculation" (I forgot the source). Sure, a line being catchy doesn't *make* it true. Or wrong. And (believe it or not) a text can be dull, and long, and also wrong. >> However, >> if it *was* a mistake that strengthened, not the democratic fac- >> tions, but the totalitarian core, and gave a push down the slip- >> pery slope of totalitarianism,- *if* this opinion of mine is true >> - the moral obligation is there. > >On the other hand, if it was an act that unknowingly strengthened >the secret Illuminati cabal that *really* contols Nicaragua, and >it hastens the immanentization of the eschaton with the return >of the Old Ones - *if* this opinion of mine (which is as well >substantiated as yours) is true - the moral obligation is utterly >absent. Well, let me try to outline the basic steps of the substantia- tion. (1) Nicaragua is essentially totalitarian in structure, though the *policy* has been relatively mild. (2) Totalitarian- ism, once past certain stage, becomes nearly irreversible. (3) Until that stage is reached, the regime needs the support of the population. (4) But it tends to ruin the economy while building up its machinery of control, repression, propaganda, and the armed forces. This detracts from the population support. (5) Foreign aid can allow it to achieve both goals. In short, the regime buys the people's patience with foreign aid, and uses it to shackle the people forever. Nicaraguan economy is in a bad shape; some say, in a shambles. Surely, it would be much worse off, and the regime would have far less support (or else would need to change), if it were not for a very large, by Nicaraguan scale, foreign aid it has received under Sandinistas. *Nothing remotely comparable* was received by the previous regime, or through the whole of the country's histo- ry. Of this aid, by far the greater part was not by USA. USA is only responsible for its part and the part it endorsed or en- couraged. It would not be wrong, however, to also match *other* foreign aid to the government with aid to the Resistance. Jan Wasilewsky