This week's untied thoughts
Why is silence violence? Isn’t it more likely that speech is violence?
If there’s no difference of opinion, why speak? You can just listen. But what if the speaker is himself advocating for violence? Isn’t it worth speaking up against him. If not, can’t it count as tacit support? I don’t think this can work. Am I required to publicly proclaim resistance against any popular idea that is wrong? What about the idea that debate sharpens the other side? If the other side really is dangerous, why engage with it at all? Pointing out the faults of the enemy only makes them stronger. If they’re wrong, allowing them to continue unabated will cause them to hang themselves. But what do you do if someone proclaims they have rights over you, and people start believing it?
I’d argue that if someone is deeply studying something, it’s because they don’t believe in it. My fascination with communism is growing, but it’s not because I believe in it.
Against deontology, consequentialism, and virtue ethics
Are you a deontologist or a consequentialist? Maybe you see the problems of both and become a virtue ethicist. Ok, great.
You discover some truth, share it, and get ostracized for it. Ok, were you too recklessly foolhardy in putting forward an idea before it’s ready? Are you courageous? Or are you a coward for waiting until you become so attached to the idea that you can no longer handle criticism? How does virtue ethics help here?
It’s one thing to suppose that virtue is about balance. Nobody can argue against this. It’s another to use virtue ethics to determine if your course of action is correct. If it doesn’t help you make decisions, how good can it possibly be? You need something a little more solid: something you can pursue singlemindedly toward its conclusion.
My understanding of Ethiopia’s civil war
You have the highlanders who are the most distinct ethnic group. This group has historically been in charge of the entire country despite making up a small percentage of the population (something like 6%). They’re in cahoots with the West and have used KGB tactics to instill fear in the population. And now, this group says they are victims of a genocide campaign? Within the highlanders there are two main groups who’ve been in perpetual struggle with one another.
Their critics believe the highlanders have been selling out their people and making Ethiopia a puppet of the West, for money, against the will of the public who increasingly sees them as out of touch. If those in power really are out of touch, then they can’t possibly expect to win against a public uprising. However, the uprising itself can cause the highlanders to step up their game and thereby legitimating their existing rule. History may still remember these rulers as unjust tyrants even after they’ve learned their lesson and adapted. It’s all very complicated.