In Aristotle's Nicomachean Ethics, he argues that eudaimonia is the ultimate goal in life. Eudaimonia roughly translates to happiness or human flourishing. One of the ways in which eudaimonia is achieved is by exercising the mind. This blog is intended to help all of us reach eudaimonia through political discourse. This cannot be possible without YOU the reader, and YOU the respondent. Hence, youdaimonia.

Sunday, September 28, 2008

More Voices More Choices

Friday night Ralph Nader was on Realtime with Bill Maher. In this clip Ralph makes his most salient point of the entire show. 



I have to say, Obama's position on Afghanistan has been starting to worry me as of late. I think he tends to highlight the military component of his policy because it allows him to project strength. He did state in the debate that there has to be other components to our strategy in Afghanistan. Namely, working to cleanup the corruption of the government and providing agricultural aid that will help improve the Afghan economy. 

But Nader's point is an extremely good one (just ask the Russians). I would also add that the United States and its NATO allies have been increasing the number of troops in Afghanistan. Yet, the violence there is at its highest levels since the beginning of the war. So while additional troops may help with the security situation, we have to have more comprehensive strategy moving forward. The question is, who do you trust to develop and implement that strategy? John McCain or Barack Obama?

2 comments:

Anonymous said...

I agree, but I think that Maher's response was just as spot on: a Democrat can't win if they look weak on defense.

I love me some Nader, and I'm glad that he's unwilling to compromise his beliefs, but at the same time, it's always frustrating how vocal he can be in criticizing candidates who are far and away the lesser of two evils. I'm not asking him to endorse anyone, but if he's going to go on the attack, shouldn't he be putting more energy into reaming the worst viable candidate?

Charles de Granville said...

I agree. Barack Obama is way more progressive than Kerry was 4 years ago, and is by far the better candidate this time around. Also, I think there is a lot at stake in Afghanistan, and Nader doesn't seem to acknowledge that at all.

I never understood why Nader didn't run for congress. He would probably have a good shot at getting elected somewhere, and could have a larger impact (not that he hasn't in the past). I guess I just don't understand the approach of applying for the top job when you don't have any other experience in government.