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 : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Nadine Carroll who wrote (110690)	8/9/2003 2:23:51 PM
From: GST	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

American courts set guilty people free every day, often knowing that many of the people being freed are guilty of crimes. They are freed because the prosecution of justice is based on a less-than-prefect process. They are freed because due process is a fundamental aspect of our legal system that is so important to our freedom and way of life that it is better to let a guilty man go free than to undermine the due process of law. I doubt many here or elsewhere in America would want our courts and justice system to scrap due process. I doubt many in America would prefer to live in a world where the US government no longer had to respect their rights. I doubt many of us would want to live in a world where the only way to survive is to buy as many big guns as possible and a lot of ammunition because it is now every man for himself. The law is what keeps us from descending to the depths of depravity that we see in other countries from time-to-time. The law makes us free. The same applies at the international level, where the evolution of law is more incomplete and poorly defined, but exists for a reason and needs to be strengthened, not destroyed as Bush is doing. We have seen all too often the depravity of war. War is too serious to leave up to the discretion of individual countries, just as taking another man's life is too serious a matter to leave up to an individual American citizen. The only basis for unilateral action is self-defense, and this is as true for the nation state as it is for every man and woman walking down the streets of your community. Historians are most likely to look at Bush as a weak President who had very low immunity to bad ideas -- a President who convinced the other major powers that the US cannot be trusted to play such a central role in world affairs.

To: Nadine Carroll who wrote (110690)	8/10/2003 1:41:13 AM
From: Maurice Winn	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 281500

Nadine, I think I should have the last word, not Lileks who is obviously confused. James wrote: <"The International Criminal Court, like most international institutions, is a wonderful idea. A noble idea. All it needs to work is planetary government, worldwide democracy and the triumph of reason over tribal loyalties, political doctrines and individual ambition. In other words, it requires that we all live in the world described by the "Star Trek" television shows." -- James Lileks > "The USA Supreme Court, like most interstate institutions, is a wonderful idea. A noble idea. All it needs to work is coast to coast government, countrywide democracy and the triumph of reason over tribal loyalties, political doctrines and individual ambition. In other words, it requires that Americans all live in the world described by the "Star Trek" television shows." Putting it like that, you can see that Lileks is wrong. Nobody would mistake the USA as being a triumph of reason over tribal loyalties, political doctrines and individual ambition. Neither does anywhere I've been in the USA even slightly resemble the Star Trek way of life. Nevertheless, there is in fact a Supreme Court which is accepted by the other political institutions and the public. They quite like having it overall. The USA is made up of tribal loyalties, political doctrines and individual ambition. You don't need to look outside this discussion to see the virulence of tribal loyalty, political doctrine and individual ambition. Nor do we see in this turbulent and turbid stream a triumph of reason over those atavistic impulses, let alone in the wider USA community, which is of course a primary reason to have the Supreme Court. The very lack of reason, ethics and civilization is why the Supreme Court and the missing equivalent international court is needed. If we were all as reasoned, civilized, ethical and considerate as you and me, if not the foaming at the mouth rabid mob populating this stream, there wouldn't be a need for either a Supreme Court or the equivalent NUN version. [NewUnitedNations]. Since a large proportion of the world already lives in democracies and when adjusted for wealth, that's most of them, there is already the democratic foundation for a NUN. The missing link is simply the political will to form the simple federation which would comprise the NUN. That's an easy step and I'd say most people on this planet are already in favour of it. We don't need all countries present and accounted for to establish a constitution. Just as states gradually joined the USA, EU and WTO on a voluntary basis, so they could join the NUN. It's important for people to understand that this would not mean a world government which would dictate your toothbrush standards or whether you can carry your bread in your left hand and all the other details of moment by moment individual activities. For some reason, few people have the imagination to think of a world government with constitutionally very restricted powers. That includes the readers reading this who bang on and on about the UN which currently exists. They seem unable to imagine what can be rather than what is. <It's important for people to understand that this would not mean a world government ... > Many readers will have not seen the not and will have thought I'm advocating a world government issuing toothbrushing standards. It's amazing how they do that. Anyway, you can now see that Lileks with his own statement shows that a NUN Supreme Court would be as easy to establish as in the USA, where it has been successfully deployed for centuries. No Star Trek principles are needed. Just a bit of a federation with limited powers and some international law, for which there are lots of foundations and internationally accepted common denominators. The Last Word: NUN rulz okay. Mqurice