i do not understand the aggression piece.
indonesia was famous for the corruption of
its leaders and businesses and bureaucracy.
it would have imploded sooner or later.
the leadership raped the country, no doubt
the west and other countries stood by and
watched and benefitted in some cases. but
the rape of the country made many people unhappy
and if the west had not been there it would still
have collapsed.
no other countries wanted to do anything, the asean
countries stood by and watched since they have the
main policy of non interference in each other's
internal affairs. observe the philippines--the old
dictator raped the country and stashed his billions
somewhere safe, till this day no one in govt can
get the money back. doubtless the same thing is
happening today in many places. surely one cannot
call these stable countries. same thing for tito and
yugoslavia---exploiting the people and using the
secret police and the military to brutally repress
the people cannot be described as "stable".
we will be able and watch and see what happens
when the people rise up and make changes.
rgds
leelock
----- Original Message -----
From: "Nestor Miguel Gorojovsky" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Saturday, August 19, 2000 9:16 PM
Subject: Political indicators (was Re: [CrashList] Self Determination-
SupportIt!)
En relaci�n a Re: [CrashList] Self Determination- Support It!,
el 19 Aug 00, a las 1:24, Tony Abdo dijo:
Quoting Lonely Planet...
> The consolidation of the Indonesian empire has met with resistance and
> insurgencies but these have largely been ignored by the international
> community. The country was stable until the recent economic crisis,
> mainly because political opposition was repressed and government
> authority rested squarely on the foundation of military power. After
> Suharto's downfall, second guessing the direction Indonesia would take
> became every foreign correspondents' favourite pastime.
I still remember the joy and amazement with which I learnt, during my
first course in Biology in 1972, that in order to establish with a
good degree of certainty whether a pond in the Province of Buenos
Aires was getting exhausted of oxygen due to anthropic causes, it was
a good hint to begin by studying if certain species were becoming
rare. That was my first encounter with the concept of "biologic
indicator".
Now, I will try to expand this idea to politics. I will say that,
whenever you see an imperialist agency or institution speak about the
"imperialism" of some Third World country, you may expect that
country to be targeted for aggression by the truly imperialist
powers.
This is a political indicator. Not full proof, but good hint. Very
good hint. I think Tony is after something important, after all.
N�stor Miguel Gorojovsky
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
_______________________________________________
Crashlist resources: http://website.lineone.net/~resource_base
To change your options or unsubscribe go to:
http://lists.wwpublish.com/mailman/listinfo/crashlist
_______________________________________________
Crashlist resources: http://website.lineone.net/~resource_base
To change your options or unsubscribe go to:
http://lists.wwpublish.com/mailman/listinfo/crashlist
