Thomas,
> Given the carnage of war - the wasted use of resources - the brutalities of
> ethnic cleansing, torture, concentration camps, I am willing to entertain
> any suggestions except the one you postulate which is fear of change.
We agree on the undesirability of the techniques and artifacts of war [we
probably agree on many other things]. We just happen to disagree on the
desirability of one particular tactic - an international police force - for
eliminating them.
> If we get to the point where we let slogans rule our lives, I prefer Jesus's -
> Love thy neightbour as you love yourself.
Regardless of either of our preferences, I am convinced that Lord Acton's
dictum has (for good or bad) withstood the test of time better than most
others.
> Think of the ol west and the lawless frontier town with it's bully's,
> drunkeness, gambling and prostitution. You elect a marshal - or appoint and
> their job is to arrest and present a case for the court in which a judge
> makes a decision as to whether a law has been broken.
But these elected marshals have become the police forces that, among other
things, forcibly break up seemingly legal strikes and political
demonstrations, and generally ensure that the wealthy and powerful stay
that way (or, usually, become more so).
> What's so different about an international police force?
That's exactly my point.
> Milosovec breaks the international law - the police force is sent in to apprehend
>him,
> if his military tries to prevent this, the whole international community
> contributes forces to overcome, challenge or face down the local military.
> The bad guy is arrested, a case is prepared, a judge decides. War is
> hopefully averted. If not, the war is created by the person charged trying
> to evade arrest and the full force of the resources of the world are used to
> enforce the laws of the world.
Look back a little further than Kosovo, and you'll see that those police
would have been continuously busy _and_ continually having to choose sides.
What determines how they choose? What _should_ have happened in South
Africa (during apartheid years)? What should have happened in Guatemala,
Nicaragua, El Salvador, Chile, when the U.S. was supporting one not very
civilized side in some "internal" dispute? Heck, what should have happened
in the U.S. between Reconstruction and the civil rights movement?
> Of course, in the ol frontier town, the brothel owner, the saloon keeper,
> the bully rancher boss, did not want the law, but each of them individually
> became less powerful against the resources of the community and when
> necessary, vigilantes or a posse - acting as a citizens militia might have
> to be invoked.
We've been watching different movies. In mine (possibly unreleased) the
brothel owner, saloon keeper, rancher boss, and monopoly shopkeeper (i.e.,
the more successful local businessmen) hired the marshal.
> To continue to allow government leaders to borrow a country into financial
> servitude while loading up their Swiss bank accounts, or to tyranize a
> portion of their citizenry must be considered a violation of the rights of
> citizens and those who do this must be held accountable. Once it is
> stopped, then we will wonder why it was not done sooner.
I think an international police would exacerbate precisely this. Isn't one
of the main uses of police and courts to enforce contracts (including,
specifically, debt collection, however distasteful the debt)?
Speaking of "fear of change", it's not that I hate or fear the police, but
I do see one valid view of their societal function as precisely that of
discouraging change (i.e., enforcing existing law under existing
interpretation within existing power relationships). Here's the really
frightening thought (and not one that I would embrace easily): it may be
that actual war is typically a _necessary_ step to effect significant
political change! Although I think the vast majority of people reject
"might makes right" as a moral principle, unfortunately not all of the
mighty do.
P-)
--
___o - o Peter Marks <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
_-\_<, - _\ /\_ 15307 NE 202nd St., Woodinville, WA 98072
(*)/ (*) - (*)^(*) (425)489-0501 http://www.halcyon.com/marks
------------------------------
If you're not having fun, you're not doing it right!
PS: And anyway, if the US won't pay its UN dues when it doesn't like
something the UN does (or doesn't do), how is this IPF going to happen?
