BS: Western Democracy's Achilles Heel

Subject: RE: BS: Western Democracy's Achilles Heel
From: Little Hawk
Date: 22 Jan 07 - 08:19 PM

There are a number of people around doing that scam you mention with the gas. I've seen it, but didn't fall for it. Yeah, the guy just keeps going around and seeing who will give him some money.

Let's face it, there's a lot of petty dishonesty out there nowadays, but it could be much worse.

For example: In Trinidad, where I have some good friends, kidnapping is a very common crime now. And I mean violent kidnapping. 3 men with guns showed up and kidnapped a family member of some of my friends down there out of her car in her own driveway shortly before Christmas, firing shots to break the car windows, since she locked the doors, and injuring her in the process. This is a smart professional lady with children and a family who need her. She has now been missing for over 30 days. The kidnappers contacted the family by phone within a couple of days and demanded a ransom, which is the standard procedure. I don't know how much they asked for...probably as much as they figured they could get. The ransom has been paid, but no sign of the victim yet. They may well have killed her, because she is a witness who could identify them, obviously, and they clearly don't care who they hurt in the process of getting their hands on some money.

There were over 50 of these kidnapping incidents in Trinidad in the past year, and Trinidad is a fairly small island. The gangs who do it target local middle class and wealthy people. They often kill the person after getting the ransom. The police are remarkably ineffective in doing anything about it, because the Trinidad police are corrupt and dishonest. No one expects much help from them. People are scared of them, in fact. There's not a hell of a lot you can do except pay the ransom, cross your fingers, and hope your loved one will be released...and pray.

The woman they kidnapped is a person who has done an extraordinary amount of valuable social service to people in her community in the past and is very well loved by her community. They don't care. They just want a bunch of money so they can go and buy ghettoblasters and cars and stuff.

Why is there so much violent crime in Trinidad? Well...there's a tremendous amount of absolutely dire poverty down there, a great deal of unemployment, alcoholism, and broken homes, a police force that's almost as bad as the crooks, and politicians who either can't do anything about it or won't.

Somebody pulls a stunt like that in Cuba, and he's dead...or locked up for good. The police WILL find him (or them).

Subject: RE: BS: Western Democracy's Achilles Heel
From: GUEST,Dickey
Date: 22 Jan 07 - 08:38 PM

Gee, that sounds like what happens to people when they complain about the government in Cuba or Venezuela.

R: Part of the problem is that they are told they cannot get ahead while the nastly old conservatives are trying to tell them they can get ahead if they keep their nose clean and apply themselves.

They see this horrible distorted depiction of life presented to them by the entertainment industry ( I am not talking about folk music ) for the sake of profit and they think that's the way it is.

They do a crime get caught and where are the consequences? There is a battery of lawyers, ALCU and doo gooders on their side and nobody on the victim's side.

Subject: RE: BS: Western Democracy's Achilles Heel
From: Little Hawk
Date: 22 Jan 07 - 09:00 PM

You wouldn't have that last part to complain about in Cuba, Dickey. ;-) Or the rest either. They enforce the law the way you say you want it enforced.

And in Venezuela, they have had democratic elections, with more than one party participating, and Chavez has been elected twice now. Ain't it a bitch when the guy you don't want to win in a democracy does?

They re-elected Ortega in Nicaragua too. Apparently, they don't think he's the devil incarnate.

You've got a good heart, Dickey, but you've been misled by your government on a few things when it comes to foreign affairs, that's all.

Subject: RE: BS: Western Democracy's Achilles Heel
From: GUEST,Dickey
Date: 22 Jan 07 - 09:23 PM

Saddam Hussein was democratically elected so I guess you would be equally willing to move there or Venezuela.

I don't recall my government telling me anything about affairs in Venezuela or Nicaragua. My government does not own the TV and radio stations like the Venezuelan, Cuban and Nicaraguan Iranian North Korean and Saddam governments.

Unlike those countries where the Media have to tow the government line or be swatted like flies, the American media is free to bash the government which is all the fashion right now. Do you think that might have some bearing on the situatuion?

What does the Canadian media have to say about your government? All good I hope. Otherwise it would seem like Venezuela, Cuba, Venezuela, North Korea, Nicaragua, Iran and Saddam's Iraq are superior to Canada.

Suppose that someone in the Canadian government objected to something going on in the US and George Bush said Go to hell Canada. Wouldn't that be cute? Would it bring you over to the American side and make you hate your government?

Subject: RE: BS: Western Democracy's Achilles Heel
From: GUEST,petr
Date: 22 Jan 07 - 09:28 PM

regarding your points on democracy LH Id say that 1+2
1. the almighty dollar rules
2. those with money influence the electoral process (whether its George Soros or the Oil men that backed Bush and Cheney)

are essentially 2 sides of the same coin(if I can use that pun)

ie. decisions that come down to the almighty dollar rather
than the common good of everyone else. (and since the economic system
has no accounting for external costs -that is 3rd party costs accounting for pollution, or climate changing green house gases, or
the side effects of turning cattle into cannibal/carnivores by feeding them ground up meat -with subsequent effect on peoples health not to mention the british or canadian beef industry. etc)

Ultimately thats not a weakness of democracy but a weakness of the market based economy that doesnt allow for such 3rd party costs.

Point 3. Control of mass media by a wealthy few. I think that has changed quite a bit with the growth of the internet, and is likely to change even more- (most kids in their 20s seem to spend more time online than on tv - its definitely harder to have one common msg by a few wealthy corportations.

point 4&5 and even 6 again are weaknesses of the economic system, not democracy,
that doesnt place value on various 3rd party costs. BUt the market
system does have a self correcting mechanism (which is even more effective when you have freedom of information such as the internet)
ie. if people dont want to eat unhealthy food, like McDonalds fast food - eventually awareness goes up- sales go down and all of a sudden we have more demand for organic food. KFC and other fast food industries start getting rid of transfats etc. (I know its more complex than that along with a ways to go).

One of the weaknesses of Democracy is long term planning. The Chinese
politburo is planning 50 years ahead. Our govts only plan in 4-5 year periods until the next election - and when one party is elected they scrap everything and plan for the next 4 years.

Regarding the point on how much should the govt. provide for the individual? Id say that if we were completely provided for - that would spoil us, - but this same applies to children of the very rich.
Theres a billionaire in my province who publicly stated in interviews that the worst thing that one can do for his kids is to give them money.

But when discussing this idea of govt. handouts to the individual
one should look at the vast amounts of money given to corporations in subsidies and tax breaks. (Did you know Dickey that the US govt subsidizes the sugar industry with 4 billion a year - Americans pay 3x the world price of sugar, same goes for corn and for that matter the oil and gas industry - Right after Katrina, the oil industry in the gulf received 500 million to explore for oil in the Gulf of Mexico, why? one could go on and on -

- also the idea that the free market should be allowed to function and the govt should stay out of the way is ludicrous- after all the major automakers didnt build the interstate highway system - but they sure encouraged it and make good use of it (while they bought and dismantled all the tram systems in the big cities).


the last time we allowed market forces to govern themselves the US had the stock market crash of 29. All the talk about free enterprise and yet we always need to hear what Greenspan or Bernanke decide on what to do with interest rates.

Subject: RE: BS: Western Democracy's Achilles Heel
From: Riginslinger
Date: 22 Jan 07 - 11:09 PM

Yeah, the concept of a "free market economy" only works for Goldman Sachs and Wal-Mart executives. But the slaves to convention continue to think that's what we are working with. Maybe convention is the enemy.

             In any event, one has to wonder if it does any good to pontificate about these things in generalities. It would seem to be more productive if one were to pick out one or two obvious problems and concentrate on those.

Subject: RE: BS: Western Democracy's Achilles Heel
From: dianavan
Date: 23 Jan 07 - 12:33 AM

Dickie -"Suppose that someone in the Canadian government objected to something going on in the US and George Bush said Go to hell Canada."

Didn't that already happen? Or was it the other way around?


Good points, petr, its not about democracy so much as its about the market economy.

Sorry to hear about your friend, Littlehawk.

Subject: RE: BS: Western Democracy's Achilles Heel
From: GUEST,Dickey
Date: 23 Jan 07 - 01:04 AM

Did it? If so was it cute? Did it make people turn against their government.

Would you like it if your government owned all of the radio, TV stations and newspapers?

Subject: RE: BS: Western Democracy's Achilles Heel
From: Riginslinger
Date: 23 Jan 07 - 08:22 AM

As a point of fact, the government has become almost irrelevant. Multinational corporations own most of the TV and radio stations, and the major newspapers. The public sations are the places the disseminate the most news-worthy information.

Subject: RE: BS: Western Democracy's Achilles Heel
From: Little Hawk
Date: 23 Jan 07 - 08:43 AM

It doesn't have anything to do with where I want to move Dickey. I have pointed out before that people in those 3rd world countries have NEVER had the rosy set of circumstances freely given to them that you and I were given at birth, merely by being born in the USA or Canada, in far more favorable ecomomic and social conditions. And they almost certainly NEVER will.

I have no reason to want to move anywhere. I'm happy to be in Canada. Canada is safe, prosperous, and free.

You have to assess each society's progress on the present and past conditions THERE, not here, and on what is possible THERE, not here. Cuba was far better off to be under Castro than if it had stayed under Batista. The Venezuelans who voted for Chavez (a majority of them) obviously think Venezuela is better off under him, and it is the poor who vote for Chavez. It is the wealthy and the middle class who don't like him. Most Venezuelans are poor. The Nicaraguans who voted Ortega back in obviously feel they are better off that way too. You weren't there. What do you know about it that they don't?

Give up this tired old BS about me wanting to "move" somewhere, because it's absolutely stupid. Just reread this post whenever you feel tempted to say it again.

You have got to get out of this cultural thought bubble you are trapped in where you imagine that everyone in the world has the same problems and opportunities and choices in front of them that you do. THEY DON'T! They are dealing with wholly different problems and choices, and they don't view America as their saviour, they view it as their exploiter, and as a rogue nation that attacks people. That isn't the fault of ordinary Americans, it's the fault of your government, which is simply a tool of a bunch of giant corporations and a military-industrial complex which doesn't care whose life it tramples on in order to make more $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$.

Your government constantly issues inflammatory rhetoric (delivered via ABC, CBS, NBC, and CNN) designed to get YOU to support its grotesque and illegal military interventions around the world. Your media criticize your government aggressively only when your giant corporate $ySStem is getting you all ready for an outer cosmetic change in the administration's face...meaning you are going to soon replace a bunch of gutless Republican corporate servant puppets with a bunch of gutless Democratic corporate servant puppets...and almost nothing will really change. Your elections are phony. Both of those parties serve the same corporate masters. If those masters decide the Iraq War is unwinnable, well then, they will use the media to crucify Mr Bush and his people for causing it and losing it, and they'll set about putting the next big game in motion, whatever that will be...and you'll swallow it, I'm sure.

The Canadian media frequently criticizes our government (and thoroughly enjoys doing so, I might add...). So does the public. ;-) It's a popular pastime, in fact. Always has been.

The USA has often told Canada to "go to hell" in so many words, but not with that much passion (like Chavez did to the USA), because the USA never really gets that excited about Canada. ;-) We're just not a place you guys can bother to get angry about. We basically cooperate with American plans for the most part, and besides, we're not important enough to get angry about. And that's a good thing. It means I probably won't see a US invasion of Canada before I die.


Petr - Excellent post. You have described the $$$ problem perfectly.

Subject: RE: BS: Western Democracy's Achilles Heel
From: John Hardly
Date: 23 Jan 07 - 09:38 AM

"As a point of fact"

Why is it that every time I read the above phrase, I know that I'm about to read an opinion?

Subject: RE: BS: Western Democracy's Achilles Heel
From: Riginslinger
Date: 23 Jan 07 - 10:50 AM

Check it out. See who owns them.

Subject: RE: BS: Western Democracy's Achilles Heel
From: Stu
Date: 23 Jan 07 - 11:54 AM

"Is the West more advanced than the rest of the world? Is it capitalist?   Why is there no connection?"

Well, I suppose your opinion of what advanced means in this context counts here.

We may be technologically advanced (but that's not just a western trait), but we have become morally retarded and had our intellects dulled by the soporiphic effects of living in a consumer society.

We are unable to look after the most vunerable members of our society, let alone afford them the respect and dignity they deserve.

We are unable to settle our differences with other societies in the world without frequent recourse to violence.

We cannot curb our own insatiable greed even to save the planet for our children and grandchildren - look at the sales of SUVs and the amount of cheap air travel used to see just how much we give a shit about the world our own kids will grow up in.

Advancement beyond the aquisition of material growth is not some ideological daydream, however - the fact most of us here are musicians shows it is possible.

Subject: RE: BS: Western Democracy's Achilles Heel
From: Little Hawk
Date: 23 Jan 07 - 03:40 PM

The Nazis were more advanced in most of the techniques of technology and mechanized warfare in 1940-41 than anyone else in the world.

Did that make their civilization superior to all others? Only in their opinion. You know what you can do with such opinions, don't you?

Subject: RE: BS: Western Democracy's Achilles Heel
From: GUEST,Seiri Omaar
Date: 23 Jan 07 - 07:00 PM


LH et al. should read this book

Subject: RE: BS: Western Democracy's Achilles Heel
From: Riginslinger
Date: 23 Jan 07 - 07:36 PM

It's by a guy named Strangelove. Should we wonder what his real name is?

Subject: RE: BS: Western Democracy's Achilles Heel
From: Little Hawk
Date: 23 Jan 07 - 07:46 PM

Looks like an excellent book, Omaar.

Subject: RE: BS: Western Democracy's Achilles Heel
From: GUEST,Seiri Omaar
Date: 23 Jan 07 - 08:16 PM

Riginslinger: Read his Acknowledgements section in the book and you'll figure it out. He's a good guy and one of my university professors.
LH: Yes, it is. Strangelove used it in my New Media class. It's very scholarly, but very unorthodox and sometimes even quite funny. It was up for the Governor General's Award for non-fiction as well, though did not win it.

Subject: RE: BS: Western Democracy's Achilles Heel
From: Ron Davies
Date: 23 Jan 07 - 11:06 PM

I did not say "superior". I said "advanced". I would say there are in fact objective measures of this--an obvious one being life expectancy. Where are the countries with high life expectancy?   And the ones where more than just a few can afford both the time and equipment for such things as Mudcat? Is capitalism in these countries or not?

The top country in life expectancy---interestingly-- a recent Mudcat target---appears to be-----------------------------Andorra.

There is no question capitalism must be tempered by other forces. Bush's refusal to do this is one of his worst failures------of course it's a LONG list. It seems evident to me that the ideal situation is a combination of socialism and capitalism--as a good part of Western Europe now has. And this is reflected in life expectancies in Western Europe. Other countries high on the list include Japan, Australia and Singapore.

But I see no evidence that any country which has completely jettisoned capitalism---which seems to be the goal of some posters here---is doing well in life expectancy.

Subject: RE: BS: Western Democracy's Achilles Heel
From: Ron Davies
Date: 24 Jan 07 - 12:04 AM

By the way, there are elements of capitalism in Cuba today---and there will very likely be more when Fidel dies and his brother takes over.

Subject: RE: BS: Western Democracy's Achilles Heel
From: Stu
Date: 24 Jan 07 - 04:46 AM

"It seems evident to me that the ideal situation is a combination of socialism and capitalism"

I think you're right Ron, but socialism has become a dirty word (especially in UK politics) and I'm not sure if they even know what it is in the US.

Interestingly, when you mix capitalism with communism you end up with a particularly nasty system such as the one emerging in China, where huge numbers of the workforce are treated as virtual slave labour by a corrupt ruling elite. The people have little or no state assistance and their land is taken off them by force whenever the government decides it's OK for someone to build there. There was a particularly depressing report on BBC 24 about the conditions Chinese peasants are suffering due to pollution from nearby factories. People are routinely tortured, subject to summary executions etc.

Riginslinger made the point it is all quiet in Tibet - that's because the country has been essentially wiped off the map in an illegal occupation by China.

All this illustrates the main failure of capitalism - it has no moral integrity. Communist China instigated the oppression of it's own people and invaded Tibet - capitalist China continues to act on these outrages with the full knowlege (and blessing) of the western capitalist powers.

The fact Bush and B.liar fete China due it's being an enormous marketplace whilst waging a 'just' war against another oppressive regime shows the hipocracy and lack of moral integrity the capitalist system requires of our 'leaders' (MDs?).

Try this link for more info: www.tibet.com

Subject: RE: BS: Western Democracy's Achilles Heel
From: Riginslinger
Date: 24 Jan 07 - 08:35 AM

Visited the "Tibet" site. Things look pretty grim.

         It was Margaret Thatcher that made Socialism a dirty word in the UK, wasn't it?

Subject: RE: BS: Western Democracy's Achilles Heel
From: Stu
Date: 24 Jan 07 - 01:24 PM

Don't mention that effing woman to me.

Subject: RE: BS: Western Democracy's Achilles Heel
From: GUEST
Date: 24 Jan 07 - 05:09 PM

stigweard...Enjoyed bothof your posts .
You're definitely on the right road....IMO...Ake

Subject: RE: BS: Western Democracy's Achilles Heel
From: GUEST,Dickey
Date: 25 Jan 07 - 12:53 AM

I would like to know why China does not have to sign the Kyoto Protocol but the USA is criticized for not signing.

China is currently the second largest emitter of greenhouse gases, and is expected to become the largest by 2030.

Subject: RE: BS: Western Democracy's Achilles Heel
From: Riginslinger
Date: 25 Jan 07 - 08:32 AM

You've got to wonder if wars will be fought in the future, when one country pollutes, and the pollutants blow over to their neighbors.

Subject: RE: BS: Western Democracy's Achilles Heel
From: GUEST,petr
Date: 25 Jan 07 - 11:34 AM

why not turn that question around Dickey.
a Chinese reporter asked some western politican - why should China be required to sign on now when the Western countries (USA Britain and Western Europe) were free to pollute for the past 200 years.

because we created the problem.

Subject: RE: BS: Western Democracy's Achilles Heel
From: Little Hawk
Date: 25 Jan 07 - 12:46 PM

Well, I figure that everyone should sign on now...I don't think it matters who caused it in the past. It's a common problem NOW, and everyone should try to be part of the solution....China included.

(I hope you take note, Dickey, that I do not always disagree with you on priniciple just because you ARE Dickey! I would appreciate a similar effort on your behalf...)

Subject: RE: BS: Western Democracy's Achilles Heel
From: Teribus
Date: 25 Jan 07 - 01:55 PM

Regarding who should sign up to the Kyoto Protocol, it's all pretty irrelevant isn't it? It simply just does not work, there is not a single country that has signed up to it going to make any of the targets set and promised, because technology currently in use, national interests and growth simply will not allow the reductions required to make the targets set. For all of you in the United States of America, your President told you all of this about six years ago. The way forward outlined by the US was the correct road to follow - reduce emmissions by improved technology and alternative energy - then sell that to the emerging industrial powers of Brazil, India and China.

Subject: RE: BS: Western Democracy's Achilles Heel
From: GUEST,petr
Date: 25 Jan 07 - 03:58 PM

it took Bush 5 years to admit America is 'addicted to oil' in last years address, he said it again this years SOU (but what was done in the intervening year). I'd say he realized that foreign dependence on unstable mideast oil is not good in the long term - and despite being cozy with the Saudis they just dont seem to be able to turn up the taps with a phone call after all.

Oh and speaking about targets promised, do you think Bush 20% gasoline reduction is achievable? Dream on.

(but at least hes starting to make some sense, or is it just throwing bones to the Democratic party to get his way on Iraq?)

Subject: RE: BS: Western Democracy's Achilles Heel
From: Little Hawk
Date: 25 Jan 07 - 06:41 PM

Whenever politicians set a prospective objective like that, they KNOW they're not going to make it in all probability, but they have to set a figure that sounds....(cough, cough)...well...impressive. Right? A figure that gives the impression they are serious....

And that's all Bush is doing. He's doing the usual thing. And that's what those who set up the Kyoto Protocold were trying to do as well...they were simply setting an official objective as something to aim toward.

Any effort in a postive direction is better than no effort, is it not?

Subject: RE: BS: Western Democracy's Achilles Heel
From: Teribus
Date: 25 Jan 07 - 09:00 PM

"it took Bush 5 years to admit America is 'addicted to oil' in last years address,"

Petr are you actually serious!!! The whole damn world has known that America has been 'addicted to oil' for the last fifty years. Now you bloody well tell me why it has to be down to GWB to carry that weight. The US's dependency on oil is NOT down to who ever governs the country it is down to the population of that country and their personal preferences - True??

Kyoto is a complete and utter dead duck, because it relies on constraint and current technology that immaterial of the best will in the world will not deliver the required result. That has got nothing to do with Brazil, the USA, India or China, Kyoto is totally ineffective. It will not work, abandon it and go for something that will. Be realistic, look at the problem and come up with a solution that works, don't phaff around with something that sounds good but is totally unattainable. For Christ's sake address the problem, and instead of blaming everything in Gods creation on GWB, come up with a realistic solution just for once in your lives.

One thing that marks "socialists" out from everybody else in this world is that for "socialists" it's always somebody else's fault.

Subject: RE: BS: Western Democracy's Achilles Heel
From: Riginslinger
Date: 25 Jan 07 - 10:08 PM

Actually, Jimmy Carter was well on the way to solving America's dependence on oil, with programs aimed at developing alternative sources of energy, but the Ayatollah Khomeini campaigned to get Ronald Reagan elected, American voters fell for it, and we've been totally subservent to the Middle East ever since.

Subject: RE: BS: Western Democracy's Achilles Heel
From: GUEST,Dickey
Date: 25 Jan 07 - 10:30 PM

So PTR what kind of arrangement would you condsider fair?

Let China continue for 200 years while other countrys have to cut their emissions?

"International Energy Agency report shows China will surpass US in 2009, nearly decade ahead of previous predictions, as biggest emitter of main gas linked to global warming"http://select.nytimes.com/gst/abstract.html?res=F50B12F83A5B0C748CDDA80994DE404482

Subject: RE: BS: Western Democracy's Achilles Heel
From: Teribus
Date: 26 Jan 07 - 05:18 AM

Riginslinger - 25 Jan 07 - 10:08 PM

"...the Ayatollah Khomeini campaigned to get Ronald Reagan elected, American voters fell for it, and we've been totally subservent to the Middle East ever since."

So subservient that you get less than 25% of daily oil consumption from the region, the vast bulk of that 25% coming from Saudi Arabia. I liked the bit about Ayatollah Khomeni campaigning for Ronald Reagan, that gave me a good laugh. Post-1973, the US and the West in general started looking elsewhere for their oil requirements. All this oil that the US is in Iraq supposedly "stealing", to all intent and purpose Iraq disappeared from the international oil export scene sixteen years ago, its absence was not even noticed.

If the United States of America wants to become less reliant on foreign oil, it is the population of the USA that has to change their ways, not the US Government. The latter may be able to give a lead and show the way, but it is only the people that can implement the change and bring it into effect.

Subject: RE: BS: Western Democracy's Achilles Heel
From: Stu
Date: 26 Jan 07 - 10:01 AM

"The way forward outlined by the US was the correct road to follow - reduce emmissions by improved technology and alternative energy - then sell that to the emerging industrial powers of Brazil, India and China."

Thatcher's right bollock would be proud of you Mr. T!

Rather than attempt a new way of thinking and try to introduce a more responsible way of looking at the world you suggest flogging more Western junk to the world's latest capitalist upstarts.

This attitude illustrates the fundamental problem facing a world that is struggling to come to terms with global climate change - that this is a marketing opportunity and an excuse to up the shareholder's dividends rather than the time for the human race to realise we are part of an ecosytem that needs looking after and protecting.

Subject: RE: BS: Western Democracy's Achilles Heel
From: GUEST,Dickey
Date: 26 Jan 07 - 10:15 AM

Let's take care of the ecosystem and the nuclear threats from Iran and NK will just go away.

Subject: RE: BS: Western Democracy's Achilles Heel
From: Riginslinger
Date: 26 Jan 07 - 10:27 AM

Let's see, Teribus, when were the hostages realeased from Iran? Why, it was on Ronald Reagan's Inauguration Day, wasn't it? And when Congress finally got the backbone to cut off funding for the war(s) in Central America, where did the Reagan Administration go for funding? Iran, of course.

         The percentage of oil going to America from Iran really isn't an issue--if you believe blow-hards like Milton Friedman--because if America buys it's oil from Saudi Arabia, the folks who were buying from SA will just go to Iran.

         And you're right, the American people need to initiate a change to reduce dependence on foriegn oil. But that is just what Carter was doing. The oil moguls in the Middle East didn't like it.

Subject: RE: BS: Western Democracy's Achilles Heel
From: Stu
Date: 26 Jan 07 - 10:45 AM

"Let's take care of the ecosystem and the nuclear threats from Iran and NK will just go away."

Brilliant! The myopic viewpoint of the right-wingers always brings a belly-laugh.

Let's not take care of the ecosystem and it won't matter what Iran, NK, BK, ITV or Uncle Tom Cobleigh and all get up to because they will have more pressing matters on their mind . . .

Methinks thou taketh the pisse Dickey-noggin!

Subject: RE: BS: Western Democracy's Achilles Heel
From: GUEST,Dickey
Date: 26 Jan 07 - 11:35 AM

Kind Sir:

Let's not worry about nukes from Iran and NK. When we are dying from radiation, it won't matter where we have an eco system or not.

Subject: RE: BS: Western Democracy's Achilles Heel
From: GUEST,petr
Date: 26 Jan 07 - 12:27 PM

hey dickey guess who helped Iran with its nuclear programme in the first place, (Im all for stopping nuclear proliferation myself- but lets put it into perspective)
..
Before 1979, when the Shah was in power, Washington strongly supported Irans nuclear programme. Today the standard claim is that Iran has no need for nuclear power, and therefore must be pursuing a secret weapons programme. "For a major oil producer such as Iran, nuclear energy is a wasteful use of resources," Henry Kissinger wrote in the Washington Post last year.

Thirty years ago, however, when Kissinger was secretary of state for President Gerald Ford, he held that "introduction of nuclear power will both provide for the growing needs of Iran's economy and free remaining oil reserves for export or conversion to petrochemicals". Last year Dafna Linzer of the Washington Post asked Kissinger about his reversal of opinion. Kissinger responded with his usual engaging frankness: "They were an allied country."

In 1976 the Ford administration "endorsed Iranian plans to build a massive nuclear energy industry, but also worked hard to complete a multibillion-dollar deal that would have given Teheran control of large quantities of plutonium and enriched uranium — the two pathways to a nuclear bomb", Linzer wrote. The top planners of the Bush administration, who are now denouncing these programmes, were then in key national security posts: Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld and Paul Wolfowitz.
....

Subject: RE: BS: Western Democracy's Achilles Heel
From: Stu
Date: 26 Jan 07 - 12:31 PM

"Let's not worry about nukes from Iran and NK. When we are dying from radiation, it won't matter where we have an eco system or not."

Touché!

Subject: RE: BS: Western Democracy's Achilles Heel
From: GUEST,petr
Date: 26 Jan 07 - 03:25 PM

hey Teribus,

where did I say that the US population (or anyone else) didnt know that America is addicted to oil?
... your comment.. The US's dependency on oil is NOT down to who ever governs the country it is down to the population of that country and their personal preferences - True??

absolutely true.
But you make it sound as if the Administration in charge has NO control over energy policy. (ARE YOU serious?)

there are CAFE emission standards - sure its hard to set those - because there is opposition from the Auto industry as well as the auto unions, but the govt can and does set those standards. (and basically since the oil glut in the 80s those havent changed very much)

There are other efficiency standards such as airconditioners - - cheap airconditioners/energy hogs overloaded the system in a heat wave, but poor people are more likely to spend money on a cheap a/c than one that costs more but more efficient. Its up to the govt to set those standards.

back in 2001 Cheney gave a very telling speech on energy - which indicated to energy analysts that he didnt have a clue about energy.
he said 'we are in the midst of an energy crisis' referring to California (although much of the crisis was actually caused by his and Georges buddies at Enron).

The telling sentence; "conservation may be a sign of personal virtue, but it is not a sufficient basis for a sound, comprehensive energy policy" was ridiculous.

What stopped the blackouts in California? CONSERVATION. people cut back, and used less power and the problem practically disappeared overnight.

its ridiculous from a business standpoint as well- rather than calling it Conservation/ if you look at it from an Efficiency standpoint it makes good business sense to reduce energy costs and get more value for your money.

also back then they reduced spending on alternative energy research
and now (after 6 years) theyve turned around and are funding all sorts of alternative energy plans, such as ethanol, cellulosic ethanol
plug in hybrids. I applaud the Administration on this but it's something they could have done years ago.

it doesnt take a genius to realize that a lot of the Western world oil supply comes from OPEC nations. (After the first oil shock of the 70s the west responded by developing non-opec supplies such as the North Sea etc. by the mid-80s the Saudis finally figured out the power of the market by increasing the supply and putting a lot of non-opec oil out of the market.)
the non-opec oil became important again when the price went up in recent years (which is why Russia, and Alberta are flush with money now)
eventually the easy non-opec oil is not going to last forever.

so it makes sense to start planning alternatives.
(basically with a 60mpg vehicle OPEC is irelevant)

the fact is that the middle east and the persian gulf was always strategically important for the US, (Carter made his speech in the 70s) and even back in the 53 the CIA helped overthrow a democratically elected govt in Iran -

Subject: RE: BS: Western Democracy's Achilles Heel
From: dianavan
Date: 27 Jan 07 - 03:50 AM

From Wiki - "the per-capita emission rates of the developing countries are a tiny fraction of those in the developed world. Following the principle of common but differentiated responsibility, India maintains that the major responsibility of curbing emission rests with the developed countries, which have accumulated emissions over a long period of time."

Kyoto emphasizes per-capita emission rates which allows developing countries to progress and urges developed countries to stop being such energy hogs.

It would be an excellent place to start.

Oh, and Dickie, CBC (Canadian Broadcasting Corporation) is my favorite radio station. I actually think that the programs are excellent. I wake up to it every morning. Its far better than the sensationalism and advertising of private stations.

Why don't you just put on your polyester, eat your MacDonald's breakfast and go for an exciting adventure at WalMart. When you get home, you can order a pizza and watch t.v. in your trailer down by the river. Oh, and don't forget to honk your horn for Bush.

Be a good little consumer and quit trying to convince Mudcatters that you have all the answers.

Subject: RE: BS: Western Democracy's Achilles Heel
From: Riginslinger
Date: 27 Jan 07 - 10:07 AM

But consumerism is just part of the problem.

          World population growth seems like a bigger issue to me. And if all these illegal aliens now arriving from the Third World to industrialized countries turn into Americanized consumers--as it seems they are destined to do--the planet will turn into an inhabitable rock very quickly.

Subject: RE: BS: Western Democracy's Achilles Heel
From: Ron Davies
Date: 27 Jan 07 - 12:33 PM

And of course, one of the ironies in this irony-infested topic, is that several nations in Western Europe are in fact already hardly contributing to the population problem at all--some are even barely replacing themselves. And within some countries what population growth there is is by people whom the "natives" of those countries consider little short of aliens.

In fact some people in Western Europe--and some in the US, I believe-- consider this very phenomenon Western Democracy's Achilles' Heel--to return to the topic.

Subject: RE: BS: Western Democracy's Achilles Heel
From: Little Hawk
Date: 27 Jan 07 - 12:50 PM

As material security goes up, the birth rate goes down. So...the long term answer to reducing the population explosion is to increase the material security of the poorest populations in this world.

Subject: RE: BS: Western Democracy's Achilles Heel
From: Ron Davies
Date: 27 Jan 07 - 01:03 PM

LH--Dead right. But then the question becomes, as Ringinslinger has pointed out, how to prevent them from becoming-- as put in the felicitous German word-- Konsumidioten.

Subject: RE: BS: Western Democracy's Achilles Heel
From: Riginslinger
Date: 27 Jan 07 - 01:12 PM

I agree with LH as well. The problem is what to do in the interim. It seems to me that the industrialized countries need to control their borders until conditions in the developing nations can be made better.

            The Bush policy of refusing to cooperate with family planning programs in Third World Nations doesn't help.

            Also, to Ron's other poin. I am one of those people who see runaway immigration as the Achilles Heel of Western Democracy.

Subject: RE: BS: Western Democracy's Achilles Heel
From: Ron Davies
Date: 27 Jan 07 - 01:19 PM

I don't believe anybody is in favor of "runaway immigration". But, in the US for instance, there are now at least 12 million illegal immigrants. It seems clear to me that they should be given a path to citizenship--without leaving the country.    A path to citizenship is not just waving a wand-- it is not "amnesty"---but it is a process with a tangible, legitimate, and attainable goal for these immigrants.

Also, if it were possible for more immigrants to LEGALLY enter the US, it seems reasonable that the problem of illegal immigration would ease.