Hi (P)all The failures of the continuing conflicts in western politics are deeply rooted on not willing to let go the archaic and extremely outdated ways the so called 'democracies' are operating in
The heartland is the Roman Empire in which the State (senate) mandated its powers by introducing rights to its civilians who were given a vote in the ways the government rules in exchange for abstaining their rights as free man, thereby gaining protection and being able to live a life according to the governmental rules imposed on them In doing so free will is made dependent on the possible choices giving them by that same governmental body of the representational politicians and the law making and law imposing facilities Not being able to express their own free will regarding state affairs they are left alone when moral or ethical problems arose We are still in the same situation, the moral expression of free will and judging by its own moral standards is replaced with normative fitting in the moral standards of the ruling classes who are giving that power by the voting system Not being able to escape these facts individuals are left alone in their dissent and only can find ways to change their expressions by revolutionary and destructive means This is exactly what happens in North Africa nowadays, people stand up against their authoritarian rulers with violence and force When the west wants to judge by humanitarian driven objectives they also ultimately will use violence and force to change an outdated and suffocating regime The economical power system will survive until the masses of dissent will revolt and overthrow its power What comes after that is chaos and a new beginning it is called permanent creation Andreas Maria Jacobs -- w: http://nictoglobe.com w: http://burgerwaanzin.nl w: http://nictoglobe.com/new/agam e: aj...@xs4all.nl e: a.andr...@nictoglobe.com On Fri, April 1, 2011 11:49, Michael Szpakowski wrote: > Well, I offered a hypothetical military alternative, which was arming the > rebels, more as a rhetorical device than a pratical suggestion because it > won't happen, of course, or not in the untramelled form which would enable > the rebels to keep their political independence ie without the strings > which will enable the West to keep control of the movement. > The history of Western intervention in the region has never been anything > but one of ruling class self interest - either for oil, or as a display of > the role of world policeman. > The western intervention in Libya will itself shape the nature of the > opposition. The figures who rise to the top will not be the authentic > representatives of the masses but those who are prepared or able to deal > with the Western powers (and of course acceptable to them). If the rebels > win under these circumstances they will be beholden to the West. It will > make it easier for every Middle Eastern despot to play the > anti-imperialist card and smear the revolutionaries when faced with the > righteous anger of their own people. This is too great a price to pay, > esecially when the evidence is (Yemen, Syria) that the impetus to > revolution from below is still unquenched. > If we're serious about supporting the Middle Eastern revolutions then of > course we should oppose Western intervention! > michael > > --- On Fri, 4/1/11, Pall Thayer <pallt...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > From: Pall Thayer <pallt...@gmail.com> > Subject: Re: [NetBehaviour] There's No Business Like War Business <long> > To: "NetBehaviour for networked distributed creativity" > <netbehaviour@netbehaviour.org>, "Joel Weishaus" <weish...@pdx.edu> > Date: Friday, April 1, 2011, 12:29 AM > > > > I don't think you can criticize what is going on without offering an > alternative. > On Mar 31, 2011 7:23 PM, "Joel Weishaus" <weish...@pdx.edu> wrote: >> Pall; >> >> It's really not important for any of us to speculate on what should have >> been done, as it changes nothing. >> What's important, it seems to me, is to see clearly, not military >> strategy but who's behind it, and who's to benefit from it. >> Do you think our political leaders care the Libyan People on the same >> day they're cutting aid to the poor of their own country? >> It's about power, and (mostly) men with deep inferiority complexes who >> display their feathers in deadly ways. >> >> -Joel >> ----- Original Message ----- >> From: Pall Thayer >> To: NetBehaviour for networked distributed creativity >> Sent: Thursday, March 31, 2011 2:31 > PM >> Subject: Re: [NetBehaviour] There's No Business Like War Business <long> >> >> >> I am extremely opposed to military intervention. But, all of you who >> have added to this thread, please tell me what you think should have >> been done. How should this have been handled? >> >> On Mar 31, 2011 3:27 PM, "Rob Myers" <r...@robmyers.org> wrote: >> > On 03/31/2011 08:10 PM, Michael Szpakowski wrote: >> >> If the USA, Britain, France&c had been serious about the >> >> emancipation of the Libyan people they would have immediately& >> >> selectively lifted the arms embargo to supply the rebels free of >> >> charge or at preferentialrates with the weaponry needed to finish the >> job. >> > >> > http://www.clevelandleader.com/node/16441 >> > >> > "On Wednesday, government officials revealed to Reuters that President >> > Barack Obama has signed a secret order that authorizes covert U.S. >> > government support for rebel forces in Libya seeking to oust their >> > country's leader, Moammar Khadafy. >> > >> > According to four government sources familiar with the matter, Obama >> > signed the order within the last two or three weeks" >> > >> > As will be pointed out in the future, Libya is a sovereign state that >> > the West is intervening in. >> > >> > - Rob. >> > _______________________________________________ >> > NetBehaviour mailing list >> > NetBehaviour@netbehaviour.org >> > http://www.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour >> >> >> >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> NetBehaviour mailing list >> NetBehaviour@netbehaviour.org >> http://www.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour > > -----Inline Attachment Follows----- > > > _______________________________________________ > NetBehaviour mailing list > NetBehaviour@netbehaviour.org > http://www.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour > _______________________________________________ > NetBehaviour mailing list > NetBehaviour@netbehaviour.org > http://www.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour > > _______________________________________________ NetBehaviour mailing list NetBehaviour@netbehaviour.org http://www.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour
