Different Views?

John Pilger wrote in the Guardian last week

In these surreal days, there is one truth. Nothing justified the killing of innocent people in America last week and nothing justifies the killing of innocent people anywhere else.

…and further urged us in the UK to “behave responsibly” and turn away from the imperialistic response to focus instead on peace and justice for all people. He compares the religious fundamentalism of Bin Laden and the Taleban with the foreign policy fundamentalism of the West – both result in the death of innocent people.

His article has attracted considerable comment both for and against, including a response from Ken Barnes in Sacramento who states

“It’ s quite obvious that John Pilger just doesn’t understand your situation …a continued lack of action will just worsen an already grave condition. “

So who should we believe? John Pilger is a widely-respected journalist. I don’t know who Mr Barnes is, but I get a sense of honest belief from his argument that I suspect many Americans share.

Surely it must be simple – one of these commentators must be right and the other wrong? Or can we look beyond that and understand a world where they are both right? And if we do that, then what action should we advocate?

What do these commentators believe in order to say what they do?

What is the intention of that belief?

Can we find anything in common between those intentions?

And how can we incorporate those perspectives into our own beliefs in a useful way?

If we are going to keep our way of life, regardless of the actions of those who would destroy it, then I suggest we all need our own answers to these questions…

Proactive application of technology to business

My interests include technology, personal knowledge management, social change