Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!caip!topaz!ll-xn!nike!think!husc6!bu-cs!bzs
From: bzs@bu-cs.BU.EDU (Barry Shein)
Newsgroups: net.followup
Subject: Re: Apology for EXPO posting.- actually S.A., Soviets, & Socialists
Message-ID: <1077@bu-cs.bu-cs.BU.EDU>
Date: Wed, 20-Aug-86 12:24:58 EDT
Article-I.D.: bu-cs.1077
Posted: Wed Aug 20 12:24:58 1986
Date-Received: Fri, 22-Aug-86 03:16:33 EDT
Organization: Boston U. Comp. Sci.
Lines: 50


Re: boycotting South Africa but not the USSR

>The previous article seems to suggest, though, that we should modify
>our enthusiasm by doing this only to
>
>	1) Countries that are weaker than we are, thus eliminating
>	   any possibility of successful retaliation;
>
>	2) Countries that are already in bad shape (hit them while
>	   they're down).

Exactly. But if the goal is noble, what is wrong with doing what you
can? Certainly if the outcome is to end Apartheid there is nothing
wrong with that, even if -you- happen to be aware of other, perhaps
even larger, problems in the world. You border here on playing off the
current regime in South Africa as some sort of underdog, worthy of
pity. What crap.

Would you refuse food to one hungry person simply because there are
so many other, hungrier people in the world? Of course not, that's
not hypocrisy, that's just pragmatism, you do what you can.

>I'm sorry... I am not impressed. This is as cowardly a policy as I
>have seen in a long time. At least be consistent in your idealism.

Wrong. Yours is a policy of cowardice, moral cowardice. The inability
to concentrate on a worthwhile goal in the face of other goals.  You
choose to refuse to do anything until you can solve everything, or
worse, to criticize with unrealistic, lofty demands that one cannot
condemn the horror in South Africa without making an equal effort
against other horrors. Every effort has the potential to help a lot of
people, what in the hell is exactly wrong with that?!

No one is arguing with your point about the USSR denying human rights
to people. They are simply doing what they can, and what they think
will be effective to relieve some suffering in this world. There are
plenty of people working on problems in the USSR (I know, your mind
will suddenly go blank in defense and say 'oh yeah, who?!', ok, the
USA [massive nuclear and conventional military deployment to contain
Russian expansionism], Voice of America, Voice of Freedom, people who
have been working on and succeeding in getting Jewish emigres out,
Amnesty International, efforts by international scientists to free
people like Sakharov, the arms talks in Geneva, other European
countries, NATO etc etc, not good enough for you? maybe nothing is.)

What are you doing? Nothing probably, except weaving rationalizations
for your indecisiveness.

	-Barry Shein, Boston University