3 ms·
Ha. You're kind of outing yourself as a white male with statements like that. I daresay blacks or women would be none too eager to join you in your idyllic 1800
by sho 18y ago
Ha. You're kind of outing yourself as a white male with statements like that. I daresay blacks or women would be none too eager to join you in your idyllic 1800s paradise. There is something to be said for the simple life on the land, though for me I'll keep my A380s, internet and penicillin, thanks.
I like your point about "be careful what you wish for". America was certainly left holding the bag all right, and perhaps it took a long time to sink in the reasons that the Europeans had been so eager to hand it over. Truth is, no one country should be holding that bag, which is why a proper UN (not necessarily the UN we have today) is so desirable and inevitable. Hopefully the USA, realising that playing the role of global policeman is not the fun career it envisaged in its youth, will come to realise that a supranational pseudo-government is actually a very good idea. I predict this "realisation" will occur right about the time China overtakes the USA as the world's pre-eminent nation, in perhaps 20 or 30 years' time.
Well, like I said, the Iraq question is a very, very dead horse by now. The American opinion might have something to do with WMDs and UN Resolutions and what not, but the rest of the world has pretty much decided Iraq was pretty much just a 9/11 scapegoat and would never have been attacked absent the WTC incident. Argue if you want but there's not much point - I was explaining a sentiment, not trying to defend it. Anyway my own country was right there beside you, so not like I can point fingers. Folly on your part was also folly on my part. Ah well. Lessons learnt, hopefully.
Well, regarding the world stage - I don't think France or Australia are the peers you're looking for. France is 1/5th the size of the USA and Australia, 1/15th the size! Not really on the same level.
America's natural peers are the EU, India, China, ASEAN, CAFTA, CIS, and other blocs. America, too, will subsume into a bloc (NAFTA or successor), in time. I really see this process as inevitable. Hopefully we'll arrive fairly soon at a point where we have 10 or so major blocs sitting around a table, almost like elected officials representing their electorate, and they can duke out this kind of stuff with real authority and the power to back up their words. Not there yet, but it's a hope.
One more thing - don't bank on China's political system collapsing anytime soon. It won't. It's not even that bad, really. Communism is practically gone and if anything the country as everyday people experience it is now even more capitalist than America. They have even been experimenting with local elections, though not called by that name. Give them a few more years and I wouldn't have any problem living in China. It's a toss-up even today, honestly.
- anamax 18y ago> Truth is, no one country should be holding that bag, which is why a proper UN (not necessarily the UN we have today) is so desirable and inevitable. Not so fast. Desirable? In what universe would you want the Chinese, Americans, Russians, or even French to share authority over you? Yes, police to deal with "bad people" is good/desirable, but mission-creep and the definition of "bad people" is important because you really don't want police dealing with you or good people. Since large organizations can't resist.... > Hopefully the USA, realising that playing the role of global policeman is not the fun career it envisaged in its youth, will come to realise that a supranational pseudo-government is actually a very good idea. What experience with supranationals supports that theory? Isolationism is the least bad choice. Occasionally, it doesn't work, and it sucks for countries with neighbors who have bad habits, but intervention has only two outcomes, and they're both bad. (There's nothing that breeds hatred better than actually helping someone who didn't want to be helped. And, if they actually want to be helped, there's really very little to do for them.) And no, it doesn't matter that the intervention is coming from folks who belong to a supranational. This is without even considering what the fact that the greatest evils come from folks who "meant well" means for a supranational.
- sho 18y ago" In what universe would you want the Chinese, Americans, Russians, or even French to share authority over you?" They already do, of course. Heard of the WTO? Anyway, I'm not proposing we submit all authority to the UN. One country One vote doesn't work, IMO. But One Trade Bloc One Vote is far more palatable. The arguments you make against global police are generalisable to local police, too. Yes, corruption is a danger. With good governance this is manageable. "What experience with supranationals supports that theory?" The WTO, which has, as far as I can see, been a smashing success. I don't really understand the rest of your points. "Isolationism" has not been practised by the USA for a century. I would be a lot more persuaded by your points about an evil supranational if we didn't see so much evil perpetrated by mere nations all around us. You might fear the USA's wings being clipped, but everyone elses' would be as well. And a global body with real power and moral mandate could do real good. For example, it could have stopped Darfur. And, being disinterested in China's exports, it could constrain their misadventures in Tibet and Africa too. Think "WTO with morals". Does that really sound so bad?