[From Bjorn Simonsen (2003.03.15:10:00EST)]
I wrote a mail to Rick about the CSG annual dues and in his answer he asked:
PS. What do they think of the Iraq war thing in Norway?
I have followed the discussion about "the Iraq war thing" under the subjects
"PC study of culture", "HPCT conflict", "How culture colors the way the mind
works" and more.
First I'll say that I really don't know what _they_ think. I am not quite
sure if I really know what I am reading and listening to in newspapers and
radio/TV because those variables are only one part of my perceptual signals.
But reading and listening to newspapers and radio/TV takes part in the
result I am presenting below. This is the result of what _I_ think.
I have sympathy with you Americans after the experience of "the 11. of
September". After this experience the Americans started a war against
terrorism. The US government did it alone.
In Norway as in the USA and in Europe and in the Near East there are many
individuals and groups of individuals that take part in "the Iraq thing_
with vicarious arguments for what they really control. Their vicarious
arguments are "the Results of _their_ "muscle tensions" when they control
what they really control.
I don't know what _they_ really control, but I think somebody control "the
power of Europe" after the vacuum that aroused after the fall of (the other
superpower) the Soviet republic.
Other control "their re-election" or "getting money from the government"
(Red cross and other corresponding organizations which have a job to
somewhere) and I think I have met many people control being a pacifist.
I am sure that organizations (the Norwegian government) control "the Iraq
thing" when the Norwegian ambassador in UN said "UN must give the inspectors
more time and there must be a limit for that time". The ambassador said what
the foreign and the prime minister has told him to say. I do think that the
foreign minister and the prime minister were capable to control a common
variable when they shaped the statement the ambassador expressed. Kent
McClelland showed me that two persons can Collective control perceptions. I
assume he is correct and I also assume that each individual control their
perceptions. I don't assume an organization composed of 10, 100 or 1000
members can collective control perceptions. When a representative for an
organization express a public opinion I assume s/he control his own
perceptions.
I myself control _my respect for other people_ when I read/listen to their
arguments. If I am not able to control these arguments because an
interpersonal conflict I often put the newspaper away or turn off the radio.
If I control the arguments the error turns to zero and I continue to control
other "things".
There are so many "Proximal Physical Stimulus representing "the Iraq thing""
arriving my Input functions nowadays. And they make me confused.
Nevertheless I can present a meaning for myself.
1. The US government has decided to squeeze Sadam Hussein by locating a
great part of their army around Iraq. The basis of this locating is not to
attack Iraq, but to squeeze Sadam Hussein.
2. The conflict between USA and France/Germany/Russia/.. are the price of
this squeezing.
3. There will be no offensive against Iraq. There will be a political
solution of one kind.
4. The rest of the world will not believe the US government when they
publish that they basically wouldn't attack Iraq.
5. The UN will locate a UN police-group in Iraq to help the new Iraq
government shaping a kind of democracy. This UN police-group will be in Iraq
in 20 years.
6. There will be a new start for peace negotiations between Israel and
Palestine.
7. The UN will survive but NATO will not. There will be a new European
Common Army and Norway will join the EU. The UN will enhance its position in
the world three years after USA has got a new administration (democratic).
Time will show. (whitin 10 days)
PS. I feel myself social unwell when I don't join the damnation of Bush when
we talk politics on the place of my employment. I can live with that.
bjorn