4 ms·

There is no meaningful dissent under this system. Resistance fighters are also not going to happen in the near future, because these need broad population suppo

by ud_0 5y ago

There is no meaningful dissent under this system. Resistance fighters are also not going to happen in the near future, because these need broad population support, at least regionally. I would argue that the Taliban grabbing control of the country is the people of Afghanistan fighting their own wars, as revolting as it is. I wonder though if what has been posted in another thread here had happened: if we either hadn't have gone in at all, or retreated immediately after. Maybe the passage of time would have softened up the Taliban government structure by now and there would be meaningful change brewing from within. In that sense, fighting their own wars could have helped the country. I've seen good cases being made for the theory that the people of Afghanistan would almost certainly be better off by now. As it stands today, they are reset to the very beginning of any possible road to democracy and human rights. Then again, there is no guarantee they'll ever choose that. I sort of see the point of those who argue that "we" need to be fine with that, too. However, this piece of news is more immediate and the suggestion made here relates to immediate relief for people in trouble. And in such cases, I can't ethically be in favor of letting anyone fight their own wars.

mc32 5y ago
To be terse, a population has to be ready to receive a system of government for it to work. It has to be organic and can take many decades to play out. Russia is an example. After centuries Empire and communism, they were in no way ready for democracy. Democracy may still work out some day in Russia, but not now. Also not now in Afghanistan. They need to work that out themselves.
- baybal2 5y ago
  The Democracy also doesn't work in USA. Americans are too immature for the Democracy, so let's hand the country to Putin. People following your line of logic are so arrogant, and coarse.
maccolgan 5y ago
Why is there a extremely pervasive belief in the HN crowd that there is The Right Way and every country must immediately adopt it (and if they do not, they are making a mistake)? It just seems like Afghanistanis are self-determining to support Taliban anywhere outside of Kabul.
- ud_0 5y ago
  > Why is there a extremely pervasive belief in the HN crowd that there is The Right Way and every country must immediately adopt it (and if they do not, they are making a mistake)? I can't speak for the others, but for me it's because I'm a humanist and I strongly believe governments must be, as well. I'm arguing from a perspective of minimizing human suffering and (ideally) optimizing progress and development towards a future that is pleasant, prosperous, and scientifically literate. On the more contentious side I would also argue the implementation of a state in such a society must be entirely secular, even if there is a majority religion, because the humanist goals laid out above are fundamentally incompatible with a state religion. But as I said, that particular bias is mostly my personal opinion and could be considered outdated (maybe a side effect of my age). That is not to say there is a single ideal country I can point at and declare that they're currently fulfilling this ambition completely. But it's easy to identify a government, power structure, or ideology where the core agendas actively move society further away from it. I understand why these kinds of value judgements don't sit right with you, but I'm not arguing for the superiority of Western culture per se. Edit: About your point of "immediately" adopting democracy, there is no moderate time span. Fundamentalist regimes with popular support, especially when they're religion-based, are usually incredibly stable because of the way consent is continually built and dissent is harshly squashed. If a country slides politically over time, it's usually not towards a secular democracy. Chances are the Taliban will rule Afghanistan for many generations. > It just seems like Afghanistanis are self-determining to support Taliban anywhere outside of Kabul. There is no question that the Taliban gobbling up the country is an expression of public will. I do think it's regrettable, and I strongly believe "we" should offer assistance to the few people who actually make it out. But other than that, there is really little to do but watch. It's been a long time coming.

by ud_0 5y ago

mc32 5y ago

To be terse, a population has to be ready to receive a system of government for it to work. It has to be organic and can take many decades to play out. Russia is an example. After centuries Empire and communism, they were in no way ready for democracy. Democracy may still work out some day in Russia, but not now. Also not now in Afghanistan. They need to work that out themselves.

baybal2 5y ago
The Democracy also doesn't work in USA. Americans are too immature for the Democracy, so let's hand the country to Putin. People following your line of logic are so arrogant, and coarse.

maccolgan 5y ago

Why is there a extremely pervasive belief in the HN crowd that there is The Right Way and every country must immediately adopt it (and if they do not, they are making a mistake)? It just seems like Afghanistanis are self-determining to support Taliban anywhere outside of Kabul.

ud_0 5y ago
> Why is there a extremely pervasive belief in the HN crowd that there is The Right Way and every country must immediately adopt it (and if they do not, they are making a mistake)? I can't speak for the others, but for me it's because I'm a humanist and I strongly believe governments must be, as well. I'm arguing from a perspective of minimizing human suffering and (ideally) optimizing progress and development towards a future that is pleasant, prosperous, and scientifically literate. On the more contentious side I would also argue the implementation of a state in such a society must be entirely secular, even if there is a majority religion, because the humanist goals laid out above are fundamentally incompatible with a state religion. But as I said, that particular bias is mostly my personal opinion and could be considered outdated (maybe a side effect of my age). That is not to say there is a single ideal country I can point at and declare that they're currently fulfilling this ambition completely. But it's easy to identify a government, power structure, or ideology where the core agendas actively move society further away from it. I understand why these kinds of value judgements don't sit right with you, but I'm not arguing for the superiority of Western culture per se. Edit: About your point of "immediately" adopting democracy, there is no moderate time span. Fundamentalist regimes with popular support, especially when they're religion-based, are usually incredibly stable because of the way consent is continually built and dissent is harshly squashed. If a country slides politically over time, it's usually not towards a secular democracy. Chances are the Taliban will rule Afghanistan for many generations. > It just seems like Afghanistanis are self-determining to support Taliban anywhere outside of Kabul. There is no question that the Taliban gobbling up the country is an expression of public will. I do think it's regrettable, and I strongly believe "we" should offer assistance to the few people who actually make it out. But other than that, there is really little to do but watch. It's been a long time coming.