A more complex simple question

11 April 2010 by Mike Gogulski
Posted in philosophy, police, war | 1 Comment »

About seven months ago, I posed a question:

You see Donald Rumsfeld on the street. A man with a gun jumps Rumsfeld, apparently bent on killing him.

Who will you defend?

The responses I found in the comments were… interesting.

Let’s take it up a notch.

You see Donald Rumsfeld on the street. Aaron jumps Rumsfeld, with a gun, apparently bent on killing him. Bob and Charlie attempt to jump Aaron, with guns, and fail. Aaron’s shot kills Rumsfeld. Rumsfeld’s bodyguards shoot Aaron and Bob and Charlie. Aaron and Bob die; Charlie lives. The police arrest several of Rumsfeld’s bodyguards, charging them with various felonies, and Charlie for attempted murder.

Who will you defend? For whom will you speak out? With whom will you stand in solidarity? Aaron? Bob? Charlie? Don? The cops?

  1. One Response to “A more complex simple question”

  2. By Danoteles on 11 April 2010

    As I only believe that immediate retaliation is right – otherwise it is a blood revenge, which I consider an atavistic relic – I stand for DR in the first place. The ultimate ostracism is the answer for the bastards of his kind – in an ideal world there would be no bodyguards to protect him voluntarily. Except some other former politicians on the verge of starvation in some downturned desert village.

    In the second place I stand for Charlie against the bodyguards and the cops. They should give a fuck who is the real attacker. Again in an ideal world there wouldn’t be a place for a protection agent who doesn’t care about justice.

    comments rss Comments RSS

Sorry, comments for this entry are closed at this time.

  • Categories

  • Archives

  • Core Dogma