Re: Hugh Jarvis-anthropologist! (fwd)

Thomas W. Rimkus (trimkus@COMP.UARK.EDU)
Fri, 10 Mar 1995 10:09:18 -0600

On Fri, 10 Mar 1995, Robert Johnson wrote:

> The only morally legitimate way to go to Chiapas is with a gun.
The system is much larger and more complicated than you give it credit
for. You are not going to make as much difference on the present and
future activities of a power mentality based political system by single
handedly running out into the battle with a gun as you would in
disemminating the facts to the support structure of the power elite. If
the good will of the people of the United States cannot change the
foreign policy of its power elite, then you are certainly not going to
make a pinto beans worth of difference with a gun. *Who* do you think you
are to command moral authority over us all??? You are obviously a
johnny-come-lately to the field of dissention or you would not be boring
us with your shallow brand of morality. It smacks of the self-rightousness
that comes only with the recently awakened. If you really have anything
to say that is worth listening to and you really want to be heard, I
would advise you to come down off your moral white horse and make sense
of your position. You have been repeatedly admonished by intellects much
greater than your own and have not noticed. If your vision were as clear
as you think, you would find more appropriate and effective ways to make
your points. The only thing worse than an obnoxious snob who is wrong is
one who is right.

> P.S. Don't you or Danny Yee contact me
> by private E-Mail again. We have nothing
> to say to each other.

I noticed how "clear" and "focused" your position is in this last point
of your posting. If you have nothing to say to these two members of the
list, what was the purpose of your long posting to one of them?