Subj : Bible [2] To : Frank Masingill From : Curtis Johnson Date : Tue Oct 24 2000 10:33 pm FM> In fact, this shuttle away from reality was so pronounced in FM> the early part of the century that people were SHOCKED that FM> such a thing as WW I could come at ALL. Read the history FM> books written CJ> It had been preceded by several crises that had come close to CJ> the brink while the alliances in place. There had been an CJ> incredible amount of jingoism beforehand (I have a ca. 1910 CJ> Belgian schoolbook, and it was amazing what what was being CJ> inculcated in this small neutral country). France had been CJ> explicitly and publicly been vowing "revanche." The real CJ> surprise was that a general European war would last for so CJ> long: it had "proven" that it would be economically CJ> impossible. FM> Well, I note the rather grudging concession. Actually, I FM> have the difficult task of first proving to you that I'm not FM> ignorant of the "annals" of "history" and then of showing the FM> respectability of what Ted V. McAllister has called the search of FM> Leo Strauss and Eric Voegelin for a "postliberal order." You FM> actually make my point VERY well in that last paragraph. I'm just FM> as aware as you are of the revanche movement wherein one of the FM> French statesmen after the humiliation of the Franco-Prussian War FM> said that he could think of no other reason for living except to FM> take revenge for Alsace and Lorraine. The ancient Treaty of Verdun FM> question. But none of this reduced the enthusiams that ran so high FM> with assurance that mankind in the western world, aware of the FM> tremendous growth in firepower, surely could not engage in another FM> major war. I'm certain that you've read both Fay and Schmitt on the FM> diplomatic efforts to limit a war that the major powers, both FM> England AND Germany simply permitted to happen anyhow in full FM> consciousness in the final analysis. This was followed by the The argument I mentioned that a war would be a short one is not an argument that a war will not happen at all. Nor are diplomatic efforts to stave off a war evidence that the war was unthinkable. FM> unreality of "peace" through bankruptcy of one of the great powers FM> saddled in article 232 with the total responsibility for the war FM> which the diplomatic archives soon proved to be a false charge. FM> I really do not consider that in a Philosophy echo one FM> should have to deal with the details of historical annals beyond FM> a certain broad understanding but at the same time, I suspect you FM> are right that this cannot be true. When we have such stark FM> disagreement upon what it was that Cohn was attempting to say the FM> interpretation of what is transpiring in our recent memory can FM> hardly be resolved. I had gone back and reread the appropriate parts of Cohn to check my assertions. --- Blue Wave/DOS v2.30 [NR] * Origin: America's favorite whine - it's your fault! (1:261/1000) .