 sj |
||
|
||
BS: Western Democracy's Achilles Heel
|
|
|
Subject: BS: Western Democracy's Achilles Heel From: GUEST,Dickey Date: 18 Jan 07 - 07:08 PM 15 January 2007 Western Democracy's Achilles Heel Western liberal democracy is undoubtedly the best system of government to have evolved from humankind's 5000 year journey of civilization. Western liberal democracy, if measured by the liberty and freedom it provides its individual members, is unequalled. Yet, when it comes to post-modern Western Liberal Democracy, an ugly underbelly has emerged, and that is partisan politics at the expense of national interest. When, that partisanship reaches into the institutions of academia and the news media, then Western Liberal Democracy begins to look pretty fragile. Nothing has exemplified the point more in recent times than the raging debate in the United States over the Iraq Conflict. Daily, whether through blogs, MSM op-ed, MSM news, academia, or political parties, we are subjected to a steady blizzard of rhetoric that is completely barren of historic context and facts, military tactical context and facts, and short term historic context (who said what and when a few months ago). Politicians can literally spout and take positions then reverse them without much political cost. Worse yet, the single most important institution within a democracy for disseminating information, the MSM, suffers from selective amnesia or blindness when duplicity and hypocrisy occur among politicians. The key benefactor in this case is the "progressive" or "liberal" politician, as he is free to make declarations, policy announcements, and the like, then change course a few months later without facing the scrutiny of the media. The Liberal pundit would, of course, hotly dispute this claim. In the end the environment is such, that winning office by simply opposing anything the "other side" proposes becomes the modus operandi. On Iraq and Afghanistan, it puts opposition parties in the position of literally depending on military defeat in order to make political gain. Winning elections becomes more important than winning wars.
Your anonymous posts were deleted from several threads. If you wish to post at Mudcat, fill in the "from" blank with a consistent user name. Thank you. -Joe Offer, Forum Moderator- |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Western Democracy's Achilles Heel From: Little Hawk Date: 18 Jan 07 - 07:23 PM Everything makes sense within its own closed loop of tacit assumptions. But not outside that loop. Your loop of assumptions is a very narrow one. The cause you espouse is not what you think it is at all, and it is the author of its own and a great many other people's misfortunes. You are backing aggressors, thieves, and liars. The fact that some of the people fighting those aggressors are equally bad, as well as being Muslim religious fanatics, does not excuse the aggressors themselves. The people you're backing don't deserve to win. Neither do the Islamic fundamentalists they are fighting. Ordinary people suffering on both sides of the conflict wish you would both just go away. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Western Democracy's Achilles Heel From: GUEST,Dickey Date: 18 Jan 07 - 07:31 PM You can easily broaden the loop by adding your thoughts of what might happen after the US retreats from Iraq. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Western Democracy's Achilles Heel From: GUEST,petr Date: 18 Jan 07 - 07:33 PM actually pre-supposes that youre in a true democracy. a true democracy would elect a president who got the most votes (period). (and the Americans tried to impose a similar bullshit electoral college vote system in Iraq, until Ayatollah Sistani put a stop to it. One person one vote.) oh bythe way your DECIDER (not even a real word!) has finally become a uniter. Many Republicans have joined up with the Democrats in criticizing his 'new plan'.. that coach fumbled the ball a long time ago. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Western Democracy's Achilles Heel From: Little Hawk Date: 18 Jan 07 - 07:40 PM The same thing that happened after their retreat from Vietnam. They will be gone, which will be a damn good thing...and the country they wrecked for no good reason at all will slowly reshuffle itself into some kind of new status quo (if it doesn't fall apart into 3 pieces), and that will be tough on a lot of people there until it sorts itself out. In Iraq, it will be very tough on the Sunnis in particular, and probably pretty tough on the Kurds and Shiites too, but that is unavoidable at this point. Meanwhile, Americans will continue to speculate as to when the new Playstation or Nintendo comes out, who will win American Idol this time, and other such total BS, and life will go on. You're living in the latter days of the Roman Empire, my friend, you just haven't realized it yet. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Western Democracy's Achilles Heel From: GUEST,petr Date: 18 Jan 07 - 07:44 PM well actually some day the US will retreat from IRaq. (back in 03 Bush cowed the Democrats into a stark choice of an overthrow of Saddam Hussein and a state of indefinite peril... now.... its a stark choice of complete withdrawal and subsequent chaos in Iraq (more chaos that is, than Bush's war already created). even though the IRaq Study group actually recommends many policy choices besides a complete military withdrawal in the foreseeable future. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Western Democracy's Achilles Heel From: GUEST,petr Date: 18 Jan 07 - 07:47 PM well I agree LH, although it could be more like the Greeks than the Romans. Athens' flowered after the disastrous Syracuse campaign. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Western Democracy's Achilles Heel From: GUEST,Dickey Date: 18 Jan 07 - 07:56 PM I have never fooled with a Playstsion or Nintiendo or watched American Idol. Perhaps you have. You provide a very narrow set of assumptions. Try again. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Western Democracy's Achilles Heel From: Little Hawk Date: 18 Jan 07 - 08:04 PM Iraq was not a threat to the USA. Iran is not a threat to the USA. It sounds like Dickey believes that Islamic fundamentalists ARE a real threat to the USA and to "democracy". Those were some of the assumptions I was speaking of. Are you aware, Dickey, that every great aggressor empire in history has motivated its people to support its aggression by convincing them that its next choice target of opportunity was a threat to their very way of life? The truth is the exact opposite. The Empire itself is a threat to other people's way of life, everywhere it goes. The Empire, at any given time, is simply that power which is predominant in money and firepower, and which controls the land, air, and sea lanes. That Empire, right now, is the USA. The only time one finds relative stability internationally is when there are 2 or more empires of fairly equal strength facing off in a standoff, and neither one dares to get too far out of line. The possibility of that sort of stability ended when the Soviet Union broke up in '89, and we have seen a more and more dangerous world ever since, because there is now no adequate check and balance out there against the USA's imperial ambitions in the world. But hey, one other possibility of relative stability exists, come to think of it, and that is when one great empire becomes so powerful, so totally dominant, that it basically takes over everything...or almost everything...and no one dares challenge it. Examples: The Pax Romana, and the Pax Brittanica (after the fall of Napoleon until 1914) This is what the leaders of America would like to achieve, a Pax Americana, but they're not going to. It's beyond their capability. China will become the power able to counterbalance and eventually surpass the USA, in all probability. Time is on their side. Do I want that? No. Not particularly. But I see that that is what is most likely to happen in the 21st century. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Western Democracy's Achilles Heel From: Little Hawk Date: 18 Jan 07 - 08:05 PM I don't play those games or watch American Idol either. ;-) I was making a comment on society in general. Look around you. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Western Democracy's Achilles Heel From: GUEST,petr Date: 18 Jan 07 - 08:13 PM China wont become the next empire either, but it will be a multipower world, with the US, EU, India and Russia, but The Expansion of the EU actually has had a democratizing effect on its members, and discourages aggression - What is the second largest Muslim country after INdonesia. Answer:perhaps surprisingly , India. There are 150million Muslims in India and yet you dont see them participating in any terror network. Because India is (despite some of its problems) a Democracy. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Western Democracy's Achilles Heel From: Little Hawk Date: 18 Jan 07 - 08:26 PM India is also a country with deeply traumatic memories of Muslim-Hindu strife in the recent past which led to the violent breakup of the whole country into India and East and West Pakistan and Kashmir, and cost a great many lives. Indians are deeply afraid of religious strife within their community, and with good cause. The Muslims are a minority in India, and they would suffer the most by far from Hindu retaliation if any Muslim acts of terror were committed there. That, in itself, is a strong enough reason for them avoiding triggering such events. And yes, I think you're right that it will be a multipower world. North America/the EU/Russia/India/China So much the better. They may achieve a degree of stability and cooperation through mutual deterrence. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Western Democracy's Achilles Heel From: GUEST,Dickey Date: 18 Jan 07 - 08:32 PM "Iran is not a threat to the USA." Perhaps you should do some reading here and broaden your knowledge base. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Western Democracy's Achilles Heel From: Little Hawk Date: 18 Jan 07 - 08:38 PM I think that anyone who encourages Latin Americans to resist the USA's economic colonization and political domination of their countries, which has been happening for well over a century now, is on exactly the right track, and if Ahmadinejad does so, good for him. I'm not impressed by your link. Like I said, you are under the false impression that you Americans are the guys under attack here. You're not. You are the attackers. Anyone in Latin America or elsewhere who ever attempts to steer an independent course will be vilified by your politicians, demonized by your media, persecuted by the World Bank, and attacked by your CIA-sponsored goons and death squads, and quite possibly invaded by your military. And you will think it's all done in defence of your liberty and freedom. It isn't. It's done for money. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Western Democracy's Achilles Heel From: Little Hawk Date: 18 Jan 07 - 08:47 PM See, if I was a small country....any small country...I would try to get all the small countries in the world to band together to help protect each other from Imperial domination and aggression by any one huge power such as the USA, Russia, or China. You bet I would. To do so is not to oppose freedom, but to encourage it. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Western Democracy's Achilles Heel From: Amos Date: 18 Jan 07 - 08:50 PM Horrors -- Chavez claims Christ was a socialist. The NOIVE of da guy! A |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Western Democracy's Achilles Heel From: Little Hawk Date: 18 Jan 07 - 08:55 PM Chavez is right. He was a socialist. Anyone with a genuine sense of compassion for all the people in a soceity is likely to eventually become a socialist. But don't tell that to people who've been brought up to equate "socialism" with the devil himself! ;-) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Western Democracy's Achilles Heel From: GUEST,Dickey Date: 18 Jan 07 - 09:16 PM You're full of shite LH. Do you think totalitarianisim is good? That's where Chavez is headed. Don't read the news whatever you do. It might educate you. Liberals talk about how their civil rights are being trampled on and how great socialisim is but in the end it takes away their civil rights. You have the right to flap your unknowledgeable jaws. What happens in Venezuela or Cuba when someone protests like you do? And before you talk about how great Cuba is, it's a shit hole. They are being supported by Chavez and owe him 800 million last time I heard. Should the US nationalize Citgo? If it's right for Venezeula to nationalize American companys, it should be right for the US to do so. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Western Democracy's Achilles Heel From: Riginslinger Date: 18 Jan 07 - 09:28 PM I would think one could get a more accurate description of democracy's Achilles Heel by engaging in a short visit to The Nation of Aztlan web-site, and scanning the contents there. It seems they've concluded that people from Euorpean heritage in North America have either become infertile, or gay, or--in any event, they've quit having children--and the name of the game for them is to sneak over the border, have children in America so the children become citizens, and they can take over Congress one district at a time. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Western Democracy's Achilles Heel From: Little Hawk Date: 18 Jan 07 - 09:45 PM "shite"? You must be British. ;-) Well, mate, you are welcome to your opinion. I've been to Cuba and I've been to Mexico and I've been to Trinidad. I prefer the Cuban approach, all things considered. None of those places is nearly as safe as it is in Canada or the UK, but none of them got the favoured historical and social start in the last 200 or 300 years that Canada and the UK got either, and people forget little factors like that. Socialism has nothing to do with it. You can have totalitarianism with or without socialism...either way is simple. You just have a police state, that's all. That is totalitarianism, whether or not it's socialist. You can do it in a capitalist society too, with ease, just as easily as you can do it in a socialist society. You just pay the police well to beat up, torture and kill whoever you want them to. Canada is presently a mixture of capitalism and socialism, and it's certainly not totalitarian. The mixture of the two is what I like best, because you get the best of both worlds. Neither capitalism nor socialism are dirty words to me, but both can be used for good or evil...just like any tool can. Like a gun, for example. I do not compare what happens in any 3rd world countries with what happens in Canada, the UK, France, Denmark, Holland, Norway, Sweden, Switzerland, Italy, Belgium or other such developed and prosperous places, because people in the 3rd world countries have NEVER had the chance in life that people in the developed countries have had, and such comparisons are simply fatuous. They prove nothing about either socialism or capitalism. They do prove something about deep poverty, entrenched oppression by a tiny elite, and the lack of a strong democratic tradition to build upon. The thing that I object to about the Empire is that it works hand in glove with the tiny elite groups that oppress 3rd world countries. It always has done so. It probably always will, because the rich are naturally the friends of the rich...and that crosses borderlines. They go to the same parties, they deal with the same banks, they know each other well, and they work together for mutual benefit. Such was also true in the Communist world. Socialism and capitalism are equally easy to corrupt. All you need is a few corrupt people at the top. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Western Democracy's Achilles Heel From: Slag Date: 18 Jan 07 - 09:51 PM LH. You have a bit of a loop problem yerself re Vietnam, to mention just one. For no good reason? There were plenty of reasons and some were actually good. They made sense at the time. You have to look at the "stiz em lieben". The French involvement, the decidely different and virulent form of Communism in the USSR, the, post WWII American mindset, dissemination of US atomic secrets, the Kennedy adminstration and then assination, etc. It all went into the shaping of the American mind, that and much more. Because something doesn't look "right" today doesn't mean it wasn't right for its time. This country and, I imagine, all countries are always screwing the little guy in some way. It's a global pecking order. Remember my post on "When Big Things Move"? It can't be helped. That's the nature of the beast. When "Big" ceases to be advantageous, as in the case of the dinosaurs, it will go away, one way or the other. In the meantime I choose to support my local superpower and encourage it to do what I believe to be doing right things such as promoting individual freedoms, free and open education, access for all, etc., i.e., things I consider to be core values of the US. It makes more sense than setting your jaw and being a contrarian, unless of course, you are trying to make a point. We don't always get it right and not everyone's motives are righteous or noble but the US does afford a high degree of freedom and personal liberty and many smaller countries which enjoy the same owe the same to the protective strength of this superpower. It's not time to man the lifeboats just yet LH. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Western Democracy's Achilles Heel From: Little Hawk Date: 18 Jan 07 - 09:55 PM "Nation of Aztlan"??? My goodness! Well, they may be partly onto something...I have chosen to have no children, and 2 of my 3 cousins on one side of the family have had no children either...but it was by choice, not due to infertility. Other cousins of mine have had average about 2 kids per family. As the material security of people goes up, the birthrate tends to go down. This is an observable phenomenon. You don't see many North Americans having large families anymore. When 3rd world populations achieve a higher standard of living, they too will start having smaller families. They will become "us". How ironical. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Western Democracy's Achilles Heel From: Little Hawk Date: 18 Jan 07 - 10:10 PM Yes, Slag, it did look different at the time, and I understand how it looked, but the French should not even have been in Vietnam anymore after '45. Vietnam should have been given its independence as soon as the Japanese left. They had fought for it and they deserved it. If Vietnam had been given independence in 1945 as the single nation it already was, there would have been no subsequent war there at all. That war was essentially a fight for national sovereignty against colonial rule, but that was not recognized by the USA. The USA chose to side itself with a Catholic Vietnamese minority in Saigon, a minority which had traditionally tended to work with the French colonial administration. That was an idea doomed to failure. The country is mostly Buddhist, and the Catholics were viewed as collaborators with the colonial regime. The USA-supported government was seen as an extension of the same colonialism as had existed under the French. It then became a civil war to reunite the country and eject the foreign presence. I appreciate our freedoms as much as you do, Slag, but I realize that they are the inevitable result of past tradition and circumstance in the places we live in. They go back not just to your Constitution (or mine), they go all the way back to the Magna Carta. We are lucky. We got born into prosperous societies with a democratic tradition already strong and functioning. Cubans, Trinidadians, Mexicans, Guatemalans, Iranians, Iraqis, Russians, Vietnamese, Afghans, Africans, most Asians...they're not so lucky as we were. And I don't think what we're doing in our foreign wars is helping them much at all. I think we're making it worse. That's why I'm in opposition to big power policy. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Western Democracy's Achilles Heel From: Teribus Date: 18 Jan 07 - 10:11 PM Little Hawk - 18 Jan 07 - 08:04 PM "Iraq WAS not a threat to the USA. Iran IS NOT a threat to the USA." Definitive staements there Little Hawk - Now please, prove proof positive, that they are correct so that we can all sleep safe-a-bed at night. I am absolutely dying to hear the reasoning behind your thinking. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Western Democracy's Achilles Heel From: Little Hawk Date: 18 Jan 07 - 10:22 PM Maybe tomorrow... (grin) I'm gonna take a rest now. But quite seriously, there is no way I will ever prove anything to someone on this forum who is firmly wedded to the opposite opinion about something. We will both simply state our opinions, quote this or that source, remain convinced of what we believe, and life will go on. And I know that. That's the way people are. It's not my job to convert you to my way of thinking, it's just my job to express myself as best I can, same as you or anyone else. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Western Democracy's Achilles Heel From: Riginslinger Date: 18 Jan 07 - 10:46 PM Yes, they probably will become us, once they've taken over. In the interim, they're taking their marching orders from the Roman Catholic Church, which is trying to expand its contsituency. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Western Democracy's Achilles Heel From: Slag Date: 18 Jan 07 - 11:05 PM True LH. True Teribus. True Riginslinger. 20-20 hindsight is a great thing to possess. History tends to eventually reveal the mistakes of the past in a way that confirms our stance in the present. With Teribus, I am damned leary of Iran, regarless of their reasoning or purportments (it that is a word) and an unstable Iraq is no reason to drag out the party hats either. We may not be the most righteous nation but it's the only one I've got and I know how predjudicially much of the world feels about my citizenship. When you are in the fight, you've got to win the fight first. Then you can be magnanamous if you want. Otherwise, you're dead. And yes the RCC is doing its deadlevel best to evangelize and expand its constituency as are the JWs, the Mormons, the Baptists, the Pentecostals. I don't think the Zen Bhuddishts or the Hinnayanists are too big on evangelism but the Mahayannists have a big raft mentallity. All is Atman, all is Bhramin. We all promote our own reality and hope to make the world a more real place for ourselves. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Western Democracy's Achilles Heel From: michaelr Date: 19 Jan 07 - 01:31 AM I finally guessed that "MSM" probably stands for "Mushy socialist morons", or is it "Marx's stentorious multitudes"? Or perhaps "Max's stupid Mudcat"? It appears that we have another right-wing agitator in our midst. What do you want to bet that Guest, Dickey, after getting appropriate responses from Mudcat's eloquent liberals, will begin using personal attacks and virulent invective and ultimately self-destruct in an orgy of curse words? Cheers, Michael |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Western Democracy's Achilles Heel From: kendall Date: 19 Jan 07 - 09:01 AM I was in Cuba before the revolution. THAT'S when it was a real shit hole! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Western Democracy's Achilles Heel From: Riginslinger Date: 19 Jan 07 - 10:27 AM My comments were not meant to be a slam upon our Latino brethren, Slag, but I'll happily offer it up as a slam upon the Roman Catholic Church and be proud of it. And I agree, all those other superstitions you mention are not better. The world would be a better place if everybody would just bring themselves to deal with reality, I say. But getting back to Latinos, if fewer Mexicans had left home, Lopez Orbador might very well have won the election by margins large enough that even the multi-national corporate shills wouldn't have been able to fudge the numbers. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Western Democracy's Achilles Heel From: Little Hawk Date: 19 Jan 07 - 11:44 AM But I think that Canada is great too, Guest! Even greater, in fact. That's why I stay in Canada. ;-) Regarding Cuba, I only say that it has been much better off under Castro than it would have been had it remained under Batista! And that's bloody obvious if you know what it was like under Batista. The USA would never have rescued the Cubans from Batista in a million years, because he played ball with all the rich American Mafiosos and industrialists, and that was the problem in a nutshell. Castro didn't play ball with the rich Americans. That's always the problem in Latin America...the most corrupt people in all those countries are hand in glove with the richest and most corrupt people in the USA, and one hand washes the other...while ordinary people suffer. That is not the fault of ordinary Americans. They didn't ask for it, and they didn't make it happen. It does not represent their dreams or their aspirations, and it is against their ideals of liberty and freedom. It's a betrayal of American ideals. Did you know that Castro greatly admired George Washington? Not surprising, really. They stood for essentially the same values. They both took on a great empire and won. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Western Democracy's Achilles Heel From: Riginslinger Date: 19 Jan 07 - 12:12 PM The huge difference between Castro, and now it looks like Hugo Chavez is, Washington served two terms and walked away from it. It must take a lot of balls to walk away from power that way; hardly anyone ever does it. And by the way, even though Castro refused to play ball with the rich Americans, he did play ball for the Washington Senators. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Western Democracy's Achilles Heel From: GUEST,M.Ted Date: 19 Jan 07 - 02:20 PM Far be it from me to sidetrack this rehash of the ongoing MC political thrash, but I have a couple of comments on the original post, which was, in fact, lifted from a blog--Dickey, you should have included the poster's name--it is the least you can do when cut-and-pasting-- At any rate, the piece starts out with the idea that Democracy is headed down the tubes because, for some reason, politicians are putting political interests over national interest, and the major media are not giving a true picture of the realities of whatever--Since when is this new? This is the way things have always been--that's why they call it business as usual--the miracle of democracy is that it seems to carry on, nonetheless-- Then there is this: "For example, who openly acknowledges that a military strategy takes months or even years to unfold and to bear fruit or failure. Once a strategy is launched, it must run its course for some time before it can be evaluated" Anyone who has studied military strategy (or fought) knows that good military strategy pays off pretty quicky--it's the bad strategy that drags on for months and years-- And then there's this football analogy--"Imagine if you will a football coach who enters a game with a "game plan". For the first quarter his team holds the edge, but then in the second he discovers that the opponent is besting his plan by changing tactics. The coach then adapts his strategy to counter punch, and to regain the momentum. Now imagine that the crowd and journalists begin to crow and condemn the coach for "changing course" or for offering a "failed strategy" in the first place. Worse yet, some call him a fake for being optimistic about his original plan. Consider the ridiculousness of this situation; yet, that is precisely the reality we face in the West where the Iraq and Afghan conflicts have become politicized." That's pretty much happens--they even have a name for it, "Monday Morning Quarterbacking"-- Then there's this: "Who would've thought several years ago that the main function of USA troops in Iraq would've been to protect civilians?" The answer being, nearly everyone--The key criticism of the "Topple Saddam" push was that it would destroyed the government, and we, by default, would be forced to stay there til there was a stable, new government--which will happen, as the Arabs say, "InshAllah", when God wills it-- Finally there's this: "Yet, judging by the vapidity within the Western media and the shortsightedness of our adversarial political climate, I'd put high odds on the Islamic Fascists. They've got the will, they play by no rules while we must play by often ridiculous ones, and their religion gives them unity of purpose, something completely lacking in the Post-modern West." No one who knows anything about the Islamic world has ever accused the Muslims of having unity of purpose--a cursory study of their history will show that, even after the Sword of Islam conquered, it invariably failed to maintain it's dominions. Don't believe me? Consider this--the largest, and strongest institution in the Ottoman Empire was the Byzantine Church-- |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Western Democracy's Achilles Heel From: Riginslinger Date: 19 Jan 07 - 05:03 PM So, we're back to churches again. And that seems to be Democray's Achilles Heel. What do we need to do to save it, throw out the deacons, of course. Modern day Turkey doesn't seem to take its direction from the Byzantine Church. We need to figure out how they got rid of theirs, and we can turn those same principles on the right-wing-religious-wakkos who are in control of the executive branch of our own government. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Western Democracy's Achilles Heel From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 19 Jan 07 - 07:04 PM " the single most important institution within a democracy for disseminating information, the MSM," What's "the MSM" anyway? I asked Google, but the page of suggested links doesn't seem too informative. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Western Democracy's Achilles Heel From: Little Hawk Date: 19 Jan 07 - 07:22 PM "It must take a lot of balls to walk away from power that way; hardly anyone ever does it." Damn right! One other who did it was Emiliano Zapata, the famous Mexican revolutionary leader from Morelos, Mexico. He walked away from being president of Mexico, because he discovered that the government apparatus around him was so corrupt that he could not get them to do much of anything for the general public as he wished them to. He was killed not too long after that by a trap set by Federal soldiers. Another was Daniel Ortega in Nicaragua. He peacefully submitted to the results of a democratic election, left office, and was still campaigning for the Sandinistas, last I heard. Another was Mikhail Gorbachev, who peacefully dismantled and walked away from the Soviet power structure. Tremendous guts and honesty in the case of all three of them, I'd say, just like in the case of George Washington. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Western Democracy's Achilles Heel From: Riginslinger Date: 19 Jan 07 - 07:25 PM Okay, I looked it up. It's Methyl Sulfonyl Methane. There's even a Wikipedia entry for it. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Western Democracy's Achilles Heel From: Bill D Date: 19 Jan 07 - 07:43 PM In the interests of accuracy,Gorbachev was quick-marched out of the Soviet power structure! He was held under effective house arrest at his Dascha, and TOLD that he would resign. He did....thus, he is still alive. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Western Democracy's Achilles Heel From: Riginslinger Date: 19 Jan 07 - 11:28 PM And as far as Daniel Ortega, he's just been re-elected to the presidency of Nicaragua. Ronald Reagan must be turning over in his grave; that is, if he can remember, and... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Western Democracy's Achilles Heel From: GUEST,M.Ted Date: 20 Jan 07 - 12:10 AM The Turks got rid of the Byzantine Church, Riginslinger, by forcibly expelling the Greeks--about 2 million of them, in and around 1923--this was the first "population exhange" of this century, communities were destroyed, families dispersed, and widespread horrors of various sorts were perpetrated. all in the process of casting adrift a people who had been transfixed for a millenium or more-- I sincerely hope that you don't advocate implementing that sort of action against people who hold religious beliefs different from your own-- McGrath--MSM is dismissive shorthand for "Mainstream Media"-- |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Western Democracy's Achilles Heel From: katlaughing Date: 20 Jan 07 - 12:23 AM Not just the RCC: Church Is the Second-Fastest Growing Religion in the United States 18 July 2006 SALT LAKE CITY — The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is the second-fastest growing church in the United States, according to the 2006 Yearbook of American and Canadian Churches, published by the National Council of Churches. The Church reached 12,560,869 members worldwide at the end of 2005, with 5,690,672 in the United States. The countries with the highest membership are: * United States — 5,691,000* * Mexico — 1,044,000 * Brazil — 929,000 * Philippines — 553,000 * Chile — 539,000 * Peru — 416,000 * Argentina — 348,000 * Guatemala — 201,000 * Canada — 172,000 * Ecuador — 171,000 Anyone who really wants to know what it is like in Venezuela for people who actually live there, I would urge you to visit The Devil's Excrement. Observations focused on the problems of an underdeveloped country, Venezuela, with some serendipity about the world (orchids, techs, science, investments, politics) at large. A famous Venezuelan, Juan Pablo Perez Alfonzo, referred to oil as the devil's excrement. For countries, easy wealth appears indeed to be the sure path to failure. Venezuela might be a clear example of that. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Western Democracy's Achilles Heel From: Riginslinger Date: 20 Jan 07 - 09:08 AM In the interests of saving the planet,Guest,M.Ted, we need to figure out a way of straightening out people with religious beliefs somehow. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Western Democracy's Achilles Heel From: Ron Davies Date: 20 Jan 07 - 09:56 AM Why do I think this tired topic has been done to death long since? Once more with feeling: there is nothing wrong with religion per se. Much good has been done in the name of religion. And religion has been often abused--as has nationalism, socialism,--"National Socialism", anybody?-- etc. For those who insist on designating religion as the source of all evil--consider Stalin, Hitler, and Mao--between them, responsible for more deaths than any other people in history. Pray tell, in each case exactly which religion was being abused? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Western Democracy's Achilles Heel From: Little Hawk Date: 20 Jan 07 - 11:24 AM You should not have put Hitler in that list, Ron! (smile) The Nazis pandered to religion on every available occasion, got on particularly well with the Catholic church, invoked God as their guide, and ensured that every German soldier wore a belt buckle on which was inscribed the slogan "Gott Mitt Uns" ("God is with us"). Why people persist in depicting the Nazis as a "godless" cult is really beyond me...but you hear it all the time. Nonetheless, other than that, I agree with your point above about religion 100%. There is nothing wrong with it per se, and it is as much capable of being used for good as for evil. And here's another perfect candidate for your religion-free oppressors and killers: Pol Pot and the Khymer Rouge, who killed a larger percentage of their own population than any other movement I have ever heard of, all in the name of objectist dialectic and materially-based logic, as they saw it. They were totally against religion. Bill - You're quite right about Gorbachev's arrest, and I know about that. What I meant was that he freely broke down the rigid, authoritarian structures of the Soviet Union and allowed its diverse peoples to freely determine their own destinies, rather than using the traditional Russian oppressive force, violence, and power to keep the lid on. I regard that as having been a very courageous stepping away from centralized power on his part. Ortega's back? Great. Glad to hear it. ;-) Nice to see democracy actually functioning. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Western Democracy's Achilles Heel From: GUEST,Crazyhorse Date: 20 Jan 07 - 11:26 AM RD This topic won't be done until we're all free of this supernatural nonsense. If you want to believe in the supernatural fine but keep it to yourself. All the religions are busy recruiting, abusing children (brainwashing)as they do it; all, when they have the chance of power, abuse it. I can't prove there is no god, so I suppose I have to be agnostic but I certainly wouldn't want anything to do with the christian god who appears to be a sadistic, blood thirsty barbarian. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Western Democracy's Achilles Heel From: Ron Davies Date: 20 Jan 07 - 12:35 PM No, Little Hawk. "Gott mit uns" was from World War I. Hitler only got along with the Catholic Church as long as they did not oppose him. Some did. Many Protestants also opposed him--some paid with their lives. Religion was not a big selling point for Hitler--except as a handy club to bash "Godless Communism". Hitler's religion, as far as it goes, was clearly German nationalism--specifically the need to avenge the disgrace of World War I's ending--and the need to find a scapegoat for it--Dolchstosslegende. Any argument there? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Western Democracy's Achilles Heel From: Ron Davies Date: 20 Jan 07 - 12:44 PM Crazyhorse-- Believe what you want to. I don't consider myself religious in the least--belong to no church that I attend even once a year. Just interested in fairness--and against smearing entire groups who have not earned it--such as religious people, some of whom are on this forum. So sorry if it bothers you. There are plenty of religious people who opposed and oppose Bush's abuse of religion--and virtually everything he stands for--- including his criminally stupid Iraq war, which he justifies partly on religious grounds----to pick a purely theoretical example. And when it comes to intolerance--a major cause of the problems of the world--you may want to look in the mirror. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Western Democracy's Achilles Heel From: Riginslinger Date: 20 Jan 07 - 12:45 PM But is seems as though, just like who ever was running Ronald Reagan and George W. Bush, Hitler saw a way to use the "useful idiot" aspect of people who went to church. Wasn't one of his programs centered around an attempt to resurrect Norse Mythology in an effort to form a kind of "Germanic Religion," that would allow him to control--or more completely control--more people? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Western Democracy's Achilles Heel From: Ron Davies Date: 20 Jan 07 - 01:04 PM ABUSE of religion. QED. As I said, anything can be abused. Argument? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Western Democracy's Achilles Heel From: Bee Date: 20 Jan 07 - 02:33 PM Why do people who appear to have no interest in music come to a music forum and post their political views? Are these people paid to do this? Guest Dickey, are you at all interested in folk music, or blues, or bluegrass? If not, why aren't you posting on a political board? |
