?

Log in

No account? Create an account
history and objectivism - Accretions

Fata Morgana
2004-05-17 11:27
history and objectivism
Public
aggravatedaggravated
This was an interesting read about the alleged actions by the government leading up to the prisoner abuse in Iraq.

Here's another interesting article about India, by Arundhati Roy, an author I admire.

I'm frustrated by the usual questions of: how much of this is true? What's still unknown? How does the journalist have access to all of these memos and documents anyway? And if this all is true, how can anyone remain on the pro-government side of the fray without implicitly sanctioning illegal torture/abuse?

Furthermore, how different is this from other conflicts? Why isn't it also front-page news that various governments that the U.S. supports in South America and elsewhere are fascist? What can I believe, anyway?

Interesting as the above article is, there's no way for me to evaluate the veracity of the claims in it. The most frustrating thing about this is that there is an objective truth. One version of all that I've been reading about actually did happen. That makes it so much more frustrating than arguing about religion, ethics, or other matters of opinion. History seems like it should be scientific, but it isn't replicable.
Comment | | Link






browse
my journal
September 2013