Well its the same logic as if you are not with us you are against us. But there is a very good poem by a catholic priest who lived under Nazi Germany.
hen the Nazis came for the communists,
I remained silent;
I was not a communist.
When they locked up the social democrats,
I remained silent;
I was not a social democrat.
When they came for the trade unionists,
I did not speak out;
I was not a trade unionist.
When they came for me,
there was no one left to speak out.
2007-06-09 11:41:55
·
answer #1
·
answered by Nickoo 5
·
5⤊
0⤋
There is a fine line between neutrality and ethical ignorance. As well, political bias and ethical knowledge are not mutually exlusive. The claim that neutrality is good is based on the unacceptable assumption that political bias is always wrong. Anti-oppression thinkers recognize that political bias can be right. The neutral fool can claim it is wrong to be politically biased even against inequality, even against injustice. Being neutral makes it easy to be an oppressor.
2007-06-09 11:50:32
·
answer #2
·
answered by MindTraveler 4
·
3⤊
0⤋
I was not going to answer this one and then I saw Smart Guys answer and could not let that one go. All that baloney about England and America standing up to tyranny and oppression. I think that if you try being bombed by cruise missiles and cluster bombs, having your countries infrastructure torn to pieces and having you friends and relatives killed and mutilated or just disappeared by the CIA then you might find that fairly tyrannical and oppressive.
Back to the question. Problem with the question is that In the white house oppression and liberation seem to be interchangeable at will.
2007-06-10 09:22:47
·
answer #3
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋
I read a statement somewhere which may serve as the answer to it: If u find someone being oppressed by an oppressor stop him/them using ur hands if u cant stop him/then using ur hands then use ur mouth and if ur feeling too weak to stop them by both hand and mouth at least just think in ur heart that they are doing the wrong thing!
2007-06-09 11:42:47
·
answer #4
·
answered by cheetah 3
·
2⤊
0⤋
are you against these countries, why did you list them? And i think that people who are neutral do seem to side with the oppressor or maybe they are just too weak to say anything at all. But those who do not stand up will find no one to help them at the end.
2007-06-09 11:43:41
·
answer #5
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋
Yes.
Neutral response to oppression is the same as passive acceptance - essentially, it is the same as choosing the side of the oppressor even though you actually don't actively aid or even support the oppressor.
2007-06-09 11:46:54
·
answer #6
·
answered by LeAnne 7
·
3⤊
0⤋
WEll, that is a good question as i am getting mentally abused and everyone seems to be quiet. No one except my son sticks up for me in a forceful manner. Everyone tiptoes around my husband and it allows him to abuse me even more as there are no reprocussions to his actions. But then when i am quiet he does lay off for a while. yet if i take a stand now and then and ''let him have an earfull'' that shuts him up for awhile too if i say the right things.. I am leaving and divorcing him. It is very confusing really and a good question. I can't wait to hear the answers from everyone else myself.
2007-06-09 11:43:25
·
answer #7
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
1⤋
It is an excellent question. At the very least you are tacitly approving of the oppression.
As for your examples, the Palestinians could get their land and government if they would stop allowing the violent minority to use their terroritory to launch terror into Israel. Isn't that a different kind of oppression.
Iraq, the terrorists use violence to try to force us out and push their people to put them in charge. Is that not oppression on their side.
Cuba and Venezuela are dictators who have been there too long. Is the embargo on Cuba coosing a side?
Is dealing and buying Venezeulian oil choosing a side? Good question.
2007-06-09 11:51:14
·
answer #8
·
answered by Tom Sh*t 3
·
2⤊
3⤋
Well....I'm not neutral in the face of oppression, and, as far as I can recollect, I've never sided with the oppressor.
2007-06-09 11:42:31
·
answer #9
·
answered by Joya 5
·
2⤊
0⤋
I thought Martin Luther King Jr....sorry. But ahh Yes. I'm against jev oppressing truth and logic......but that's another story...
2007-06-09 11:41:54
·
answer #10
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
1⤋