Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : About that Cuban boy, Elian -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Lane3 who wrote (2232)	4/24/2000 5:14:00 PM
From: George Papadopoulos	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 9127

Your post was really beautiful Karen. >The latter gently and positively encourages conformance by exposing the miscreant to the benefits of conformance through exposure and example Does this apply to Robert...we go way back...I think there is no cure for him, so might as well have some fun...If you think I am going overboard please tell me and I will stop. again thanks for your wisdom.

To: Lane3 who wrote (2232)	4/24/2000 7:49:00 PM
From: nealm	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 9127

Karen, Interesting post. But, I believe you oversell the notion that nations exert influence on other nations in the way individuals influence other individuals. Specifically, the rulers of authoritarian regimes develop and promote constructs (fascism, communism, etc) to valid there power to their citizens and to themselves. Hilter's use of racism comes to mind as a powerful construct. These governments simply don't have the anthromorphic qualities that make them eminable to outside influence. The history of the 20th century has shown that neither appeasement nor intimidations have had any appreciable influence on communist or other dictatorial governments. For example Noriega in Panama never did cave in on US gift offers or later US threats of force. He was ousted only after the exercise of military force. Another example was relationship between the US and China. Neither the saber ratings of the past nor the appeasement of the Clinton administration has had an appreaciable effect on the behavior of Chinese communists. The 20th century has also shown that there only two proven courses of action when dealing with these repressive regimes . 1.) Direct exercise of power. War with the Nazis and the fascists. Removal of Noreiga from Panama. Expulsion of Iraq from Kuwait 2.) Time. That is wait for repressive regimes' construct to collapse like a house of cards. The US policy of containment of communism is the best example. With Cuba, the containment policy has been very effective in diminishing the spread of its form of government. In time (probably after the death of Castro) Cuba itself will read itself of communism and hopefully will become democratic. Lastly, people do have the right to make value based judgements. There is a right and wrong course of action in most forms of human behaviour, and there is good and evil in the world. Hitler was evil. Stalin was evil. Castro is evil.

To: Lane3 who wrote (2232)	4/25/2000 10:31:00 AM
From: Machaon	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 9127

<< The downside of the positive approach is that the failure to condemn appears to be giving aid and comfort to the enemy and looks to true believers like a weakening of valued principles. >> There are two main sides in this dispute. You have the Cuban exile families, who have had their property taken away, members of their families put into prison for years, members of their families murdered by Castro's regime, and have had thousands of children separated from their parents without much hope of being reunited. These are the victims of Castro's selfish and ruthless government. The other side, of course, is Castro's. Those that condemn the victims, of any crime, give aid and comfort to the criminals. It's not a matter of weakened principles as much as it is a lack of principles. << There is no need to demonize them. >> What if the shoe fits? (footnote: I appreciate the substance of your note, your different view, and the absence of demonizing. <g>)