"America touts itself as the land of the free, but the number one freedom that you and I have is the freedom to enter into a subservient role in the workplace. Once you exercise this freedom you've lost all control over what you do, what is produced, and how it is produced. And in the end, the product doesn't belong to you. The only way you can avoid bosses and jobs is if you don't care about making a living. Which leads to the second freedom: the freedom to starve." --Tom Morello

__________________
“Capitalism cannot reform itself; it is doomed to self-destruction. No universal selfishness can bring social good to all.” —Dr. W.E.B. Du Bois

Sadistic, you miss the basic point. If there is so much faith that people would choose democracy, why not let them choose it. We didn't invent it for ourselves overnight. Nor did we have it enforced on it. It took a lot of historical development, a lot of nasty lessons, a lot of experimentation, revolution, war, etc.
They should reach their way through their own evolution, their own experimentation, their own revolution. Placing our own version makes it not ours.
It's the same flaw as in communist expansionism. History takes time.

__________________
"Man lives in the sunlit world of that which he believes to be reality. But unseen by most is an underworld, a place that is just as real... but not as brightly lit... A DARK SIDE!"
-opening from Tales From the Darkside

Bravo!

__________________
“Capitalism cannot reform itself; it is doomed to self-destruction. No universal selfishness can bring social good to all.” —Dr. W.E.B. Du Bois

Because of Hama's past history. Although I am not aware of any "threats" made to Hamas beyond the severing of diplomatic relations. Can you elaborate?

Prove that we can only choose between two parties.

My ballot had a dozen parties on it. How do you explain that? Are you making the claim that it is impossible to get elected unless you are a Democrat or Republican?

Because despots do not give them that option. That seems obvious to me.

Austrailia never fought for their freedom. It was handed to them. Are you making the claim that we should not consider them a true democracy since they never fought for their freedom?

The same thing could be said for Japan and Germany as well.

Unfortunately, that puts us at risk. We dont have time to wait for them to get around to a revolution.

Huh?

I advocate giving power to the masses. What is more equitable than that?

__________________
My Political Blog (Updated Oct 3rd) - Which Flame Warrior are you?

America has been threatening to end all relations with Palestine just because the people there voted for Hamas, and who says the US isnt hypocritical. Maybe there are other parties on the ballot choice but the problem is that neither the Republicans or Democrats have given them any space to get their message across to be heard, existing as they may beits no use unless theyre given equal use of the media. In this country? Yes its impossible to be elected unless youre a Democrat or a Republican. Despots dont give them that option and thats why its up to them to start a revolution instead of us smashing their way of life, telling them their free while we occupy their nation, and fill their government with US puppets. Just because Australia, Germany, and Japan didnt fight for freedom doesnt give us the right to force feed Iraq with it. Were America, we have all the time in the world and if we dont we can make time and I fail to see how a nation like Iraq is any threat to the worlds only remaining super-power, thats like a pitbull feeling threatened by a poodle. And what Javas trying to say is just because we invade a country and say "here, go be free" doesnt make it free. They have to be allowed to come up with their own system without international meddling.

__________________
“Capitalism cannot reform itself; it is doomed to self-destruction. No universal selfishness can bring social good to all.” —Dr. W.E.B. Du Bois

I am a commy, When I go balls out and lose all my money i will look to exploit the hand outs. Just like everyone else.

You gotta be &$^%$# kidding me! The natives of Australia had their way of life destroyed by the people who displaced them. Then later when England decided empire was too expensive, they gave it to those settlers. Never mind that those settlers already had the same culture as the English. Are you planning on displacing the people of the ME with white Europeans so that they can just take up our ideas of freedom the easy way? So far that idea has worked well in the US, Canada, and Australia.
A better example for what you're trying to push is India, since they managed to get their country from the British without violent revolution and without being displaced by English settlers. Note that the way they won their country was simply by exposing some of them, one really amazing one in particular, with Western philosophy and allowing the thought to inspire change. Oh but wait, that's also true for Ho Chi Minh! (*)(*)(*)(*). Sometimes they take our ideas and do stuff we don't like. I guess we have to force it on them.
If the ideas do not inspire change in the people they're given to then leave them the %#$@ alone. And if the ideas inspire something we don't like, don't complain. It's up to us to inspire change, not to mold the world in our image. Unless you want to displace every population on the globe.
And as for Germany and Japan: Germany was a Western country with a similar culture. Japan had a very adaptable culture (they've always prided themselves in taking ideas that work- thus their imperialism and later capitalism) and they're a mostly homogenous culture that doesn't mind a rule by the mode (something you seem to think would be great in this country but will never happen).

__________________
"Man lives in the sunlit world of that which he believes to be reality. But unseen by most is an underworld, a place that is just as real... but not as brightly lit... A DARK SIDE!"
-opening from Tales From the Darkside

that's the problem with communism, you can only get people on board when they are dirt poor.... and then everyone suffers equally.

Yet...we are not moving to overthrow them. Why do you think that is?

Why should we be forced to have relations with governments we dont agree with?

They are not being muzzled...they can raise money and buy advertising space like anyone else.

But that takes grass roots support. They dont have grass roots support, because they cant find people that agree with their message.

No, it is not impossible. It is harder because most people dont agree with their message.

The fact that you cant force me to hear what you have to say does not mean you dont have freedom of speech.

If they are not willing, then it isnt really their way of life. The only way you can prove they are willing is through democracy.

The current government is elected by them, not appointed by us.

Poll data indicates the vast majority of the Iraqi masses agree with the decisions of the original appointed government anyway. So you are wrong either way.

We dont have the right to "force feed" freedom? heh heh

"Hey, how do you know they dont LIKE being slaves?". Uh-huh....

Yes, I am going to assume by default that they dont want to be slaves. Sue me.

We dont have all the time in the world. We are stronger than any other nation but we are not invulnerable. 911 should prove that to you if nothing else. Your logic seems to be "well, wait until we are actually nuked, THEN we can do something about it". Sorry, I'm not going to wait until after it happens if I have any choice. And most Americans seem to agree with me.

Even if the poodle cant kill the pitbull, it can still cause a lot of damage before the pit bull kills it. Why take chances?

They have options now where they didnt before. That = freedom.

I bet pedophiles say the exact same thing about the government. How do you know the children dont want to be molested?

I wasnt talking about the natives.

So is it a democracy or not?

What about Japan then? Same thing...they did not fight for their freedom either. Are they not a true democracy?

When did I suggest that? Please avoid putting words in my mouth.

We cant leave them the fuсk alone, because the dictators that control them are a threat to us as well.

How are we molding the world in our image if we are giving them a choice? They can change their government back to what it was if that is what they really want. Right?

It amazes me that Americans actually believe that NOT giving people a choice is a good thing. I dont get why that isnt as offensive to them as it is to me. Americans should know better.

Says who? How are you objectively determining which cultures are "very adaptable" and which arnt?

By that same logic, lets install democracies in the middle east then...I am willing to be they will prove to be just as adaptable in 30 or 40 years.

__________________
My Political Blog (Updated Oct 3rd) - Which Flame Warrior are you?

I find the marxist attack on capitalism devastating, and thus have many communist sympathies, however I disagree with the planned economy thesis (I know some marxists defend marx by saying that the planned economy was really peddled by Engels (because he supported it long before e.g. speeches in Elberfield etc.), but it is in the communist manifesto, seemingly contradictory however, to the dissolution of government idea). Basically, how can any planner have the ability to provide and organise for the needs of the entire population, this is one part of the theory that can get knocked down easily because their is evidence of it, in planned economy states. The criticism that some come out with, the "human nature, greedy" argument (that I'm not so sure of but would like to tackle) is also levelled at the planned economy.

So the question is how can we combine equality with dynamism?

Some say the social market system, used by some European states such as Sweden (who enjoy the highest standard of living in the world), but this is still a capitalist system, and would still be vunerable to the marxist critique. This is the best system I can see on a nation-wide level today, but I believe we can still do better.

What if the workers controlled the means of production but not via an all-powerful, hideously bureacratic state? What if all the people who worked in a factory, a farm or whatever, were equal shareholders in that company. The workers would be better motivated than under either the capitalist system or the Communist system because they would be directly benefiting from their hard work (under a capitalist system the owner gains from the hard work, under a Soviet-model system the state gains), and it would be a system of just short of perfect equality.