While I certainly don’t care for McCain and will not shed a tear, and I find this eulogizing a bit despicable itself considering all the misdeeds by McCain during his life, it is also hardly a cause for celebration either.
McCain’s death is not a cause for celebration, but I am deeply disappointed in all of the myopic “crossing-the-aisle/integrity/patriot” takes. Not surprised in the least, though.
It’s annoying seeing both liberals making comments/tweets about the very many bad things he has done politically and the conservatives who are glorifying him based on his military service, alone.
Me, I’m a liberal with strong ties to military backgrounds personally and professionally. I’m seriously conflicted, triggered, and have been in contemplation about his passing and what it means to me.
Overall, I want to punch both sides in the face because people are being assholes.
Senator McCain spent like every day of his natural life defending and upholding the Constitution, while fighting a totalitarian ideology organized around the idea of the state as a giant, centrally-managed factory without freethought or the First Amendment. Occasionally, this involved something as terrible and always-indefensible as war.
He was categorically opposed to the use of torture, while some in this nation and in his own party steadfastly defend it. I dispute the assertion that Republicans have a “party line.” This is America. Despite what his detractors say, he wasn’t considered “bad enough” by the North Vietnamese to merit summary execution. That was a war he fought in. Both sides acknowledge that. The North Koreans seem very ‘over’ this sort of interest in historical trauma. They have even held and then repatriated the remains of Americans killed in a struggle not entirely dissimilar to the one in which John McCain was captured and tortured. I don’t know why anyone at home or abroad would hold on to those pains, nor to those pains originating with John McCain’s actions in Vietnam.
He defended human rights and dignity until his death and even his votes against the Affordable Care Act (recall: in the U.K., there’s been a nonconsensual euthanasia scandal) were a part of his efforts to ensure that Americans at home and abroad have dignity and human rights, and that this dignity was what the United States stood for in his time.
I didn’t always understand his voting record before this year, but yeah as far as I know he was all about an inalienable right to human dignity, and the intrinsic and incorruptible dignity of all human life. You can’t get much better than that as a politician, regardless of your wartime record, and I’m not sure why you would be comfortable with politicians who don’t uphold those values.
John McCain fought in the Vietnam war, not the Korean war.
Also he voted against Apartheid sanctions. Six times.
Yes, that was a fault of my memory, but the argument is the same.
As far as the vote against Apartheid sanctions go, sanctions never guarantee that the behavior observed by a sanctioned regime will end. So, when the USA imposed trade sanctions on South Africa, it increased economic pressure on the entire nation in an attempt to stifle apartheid, but would also increase (the, as you know, already unbearable) pressure on the marginalized. Like, if the USA imposes trade sanctions on Russia, that won’t somehow decrease the daily hardship of the average impoverished Russian drug user, nor does it necessary create deescalation.
Funny because Apartheid ended due to divestment efforts and a collapsing economy.
Yeah, but quite a few historians would say that the collapse was not due to sanctions, but because human beings cannot create an functioning economy within Apartheid conditions.
A few historians? Which historians? A few “doctors” said that vaccines cause autism and now we are reviving diseases that should have stayed long dead. A title on a person is nothing without a body of work to justify and back them.
The respected historian Steve Van Zandt insists that his boycott of Sun City ended apartheid.
The historians with other arguments, you can find them on Google or in the library, but like all of history, I wasn’t there and I have only a vague idea of what happened.
You all will hate this but I will also break rank on the vaccine thing. When you consider Pavlov and toxicology, I dunno why so many people are sold on the notion that jabbing a baby with an intramuscular needle containing a small amount of neurotoxic mercury periodically before they go to a place where bells coordinate intervals of math or reading instruction definitely does not create some sort of oddity where they are afraid to speak and cannot communicate well and do not tolerate loud noises well. Saying, “This is absolutely true always,” is as bad science as, “This is never true ever,” and I think the failure of all vaccines to be painless and non-toxic (Paracelsus’s arguments not considered) will be remembered as some of the worst biomedical engineering of the 20th century (though perhaps the best available).
The objective of science and history are both to say, “I cannot claim to know, but I believe I have understanding.” I won’t be caught dead using the clinically-authorized a-word nor the much-maligned but similarly once-authorized r-word to describe another person, and nor would I rule out that thiomersal jabs before school don’t somehow affect a developing child. In much the same way, I wouldn’t claim to know much about the 20th century, nor about anyone I have ever met, or heard about through the media.
“I believe a thing but refuse to tell you why” is not a valid argument. Go read the History Thread and you’ll see my dedication to sources that gave me my reputation as a reputable source here.
… ¯\ (ツ)/¯ dunno what to say except farewell
Moral of the story
It’s also a hallmark of argument in bad faith.
And we’re done here.
The legacy of John McCain is a long and complicated one. Like most people, he has done things throughout his life that were both admirable and worthy of disapproval/condemnation.
I found this article about the Vietnamese reaction to his death, which I found both interesting, and hadn’t really thought about:
Burt Reynolds is Burt Deadnolds.