Martin Sheen proud of uncle's IRA past

[denuseri]

Referring back to your last post, you claim that your position is neutral and that history must be viewed objectively.

Should be viewed as objectively as possible. My position is and will remain in this regard completely neutral.

You also allow that people on each side of the problem have their own subjective opinions.

Yep. Their individual perspectives in combination with the human proclivity to self justify one's self and one's actions no matter how heinous is also factored in. Which is why I say that the one side will view the other as being the bad guys. Just like Al Quida vs the USA, or Arab vs Jew etc etc ...or in this case Irish vs English.

However, throughout this thread you have challenged any attempt to put forward an objective justification – or even an explanation – of the English viewpoint. Did I say “challenged”? I meant “denied”: denied out-of-hand with nothing rational to support your rejection.

When I see a truly objective explanation I shall indeed give much praise. So far I haven't seen anything objective so much as pro-English only with window dressing to give the basest of appearances of objectivity (almost as sublime a use of sophistry and subjectivity as that I receive from my main opponent in the religion section here) at least on your part (much the same as in our discussions concerning the American Revolution only there we were both being "subjectively" objective in our own way due to the primary sources from which we each respectively were drawing our information IE English schools taught a pro-English stance where as American one's taught a pro-American stance).

Then you accuse me of sophistry! At least sophists recognise facts.

Shrugs I call em like I see em. Sophism is a hard bucket to stay away from...its soooo natural for human beings to resort too it. So much so entire schools of philosophers followed it's tenants for centuries before those influenced by Socrates was adopted by people during the Renaissance. Additionally ...I have read all the things you presented as facts...and I have read everything else you presented...my only issue (the main point of which your participation has only added supporting evidence too btw) is that one's perspectives on these matters have everything to do with whether or not one views Mr Sheen's comments as being an affront too society or not. As to whether or not the Irish or the English are objectively in the right? My call is that it is perhaps no different than the USA and the Islamic Terrorists...both parties are perhaps in the wrong to one degree or another "objectively"...with each side "subjectively" accusing the other of being more if not totally in said "wrong".

I will accept the British have done bad things in Ireland;(<<< there you have made an attempt at objectivity...claps in applause) but you must accept the Irish have done worse, more often, and to their own countrymen. It is despicable to put the blame for their own low behaviour on the English, but innate in the Irish character.

Sighs...ahh but their you had to go and resort to the subjective all over again...and that my dear Sir is where the sublime sophism is coming into play followed by a wee bit o' bigotry I might add in bold at the end. Smh, I seem to recall a certain Austrian who made similar comments (though far more bellicose) about a certain group of Semites not so long ago. Innate in their character huh?

You go on to ask,



Seriously, I still would believe there is a difference between acts of treachery (e.g., British citizens who kill other British citizens in the name of Irish Republicanism) and acts of resistance against a foreign invader (e.g., the French resistance).

My guess is you would be throwing rocks with the others at what you have been taught to believe is a foreign invader who has kept your people oppressed for hundreds of years. Additionally you would also most likely self justify such actions and call what the English are doing the real "treachery" and perhaps even honestly believe as children of KKK members sometimes do about people of color that whatever is bad in "them" it is "innate in their character".

================================================== ================================================== ================

I do however thank you for proving my point for me though. (that one's perspective determines who the good guys and the bad guys are in this issue)

It is my overall opinion that:

both sides have done wrong and that their are groups on both sides who are willing to look past said wrongs and agree to both start doing right....but as with most of the other divisions of perspective we have touched on...some asshats (on both sides) ") keep setting things up to fail, or keep pushing, or cant be objective and are going to extremes that some find horrific because they are either unwilling or unable to allow peace or accept it until whatever it is they are fighting for is accomplished without compromise in full or the other side relents in total etc (maybe because its "innate to their character huh?).

Which imho is also a crying shame.