[IP] anti-war == disloyalty

[Dave Farber <dave@farber.net>]

------ Forwarded Message
From: Leni Mayo <leni@moniker.net>
Date: Mon, 17 Mar 2003 21:33:51 +1100
To: Dave Farber <dave@farber.net>
Subject: anti-war == disloyalty

Dave -

The topic of "anti-war == disloyalty" isn't new.

I happen to be reading a book at the mo which touches on this issue
nicely - "The Age of Proppaganda" by Pratkanis and Aronson
(ISBN 0-7167-3108-8).  Chapter 23, titled "Protagoras' ideal:
one-sided puffery versus two-sided debate" begins:

  "The Greek historian Herodotus tells the following tale about
  the origins of the Persion war.  In 480 BC, Xerxes, the Persion
  leader, had decided to go to war against the Greek city-states
  in retailation for the humiliating defeat of the Persians ten
  years earlier at Marathon.  Artabus, Xerxes' uncle, argued
  against the war on the grounds that the Greek army and navy
  could easily defeat Persia.  He began his speech with these
  words:

    O king, it is impossible, if not more than one opinion
    is uttered, to make choice of the best; a man is forced
    to follow whatever advice may have been given him; but
    if opposite speeches are delivered, then choice can be
    exercised,  In like manner, pure gold is not recognised
    by itself; but when we test it along with baser ore, we
    perceive which is the better.

  Artabus' words, at first, fell flat.  Xerxes was filled
  with rage and publicly condemned Artabus for his disloyalty
  to Persia.  However, after a period of "cooling off", Xerxes
  came around to Artabus' position and canceled the attack."

It's fascinating sometimes how little changes in human affairs!

Cheers -

Leni

PS: of course, Xerxes did end up going to war against the Greeks, with
unhappy results.


------ End of Forwarded Message

-------------------------------------
To manage your subscription, go to
  http://v2.listbox.com/member/?listname=ip

Archives at: http://www.interesting-people.org/archives/interesting-people/