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: marcos who wrote (122479)	12/29/2003 3:53:25 PM
From: carranza2	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

That piece is pretty on-topic imho, as any understanding we can gain of de facto world government will be useful to us ..... don't have time to expand on it though, got to go .... to summarise my central point - it is a mistake to descend into primeval urge to warmaking, when before us lies a great opportunity to establish customs and traditions of a parliamentary approach to world rule ..... Not at all what I get out of the piece, though the Burke stuff you say is interesting history. As I read the piece, it is focused on: 1.- The fact that the US has always been a society that pragmatically adopts whatever fits and whatever works. It lets the labels catch up with the reality, which is why it is a mistake to call anyone a liberal, a neocon, a conservative, or what have you. Look at the reality, screw the labels. it is the reason why Win's "neocon true-believers" stuff is so tedious to anyone firing off more than a couple of neurons. 2.- This is altogether more or less mine--the reason we have so many difficulties with neighbors and friends, is that they do not recognize my first point. It is an educational/cultural thingie, much apparent in the contrast between the French Civil Code and the common law. The former is full of categories, distinctions, labels, ossified stuff, whereas the latter is dynamic and flexible. 3.- Labels don't work in a diverse country such as ours, which is the reason why the South Park analogy was brilliant. We are trying to bring this lack of formality, this lack of pigeon-holing and idiotic and erroneous characterizations to the rest of the world, and the rest of the world doesn't like it. If anything, it is the rest of the world that is "conservative," not us. We are the movers and changers of the world, unafraid to throw out the old, bring in the new. Perhaps this is what makes us so scary to the more placid and the less adventurous. I must admit, the "inevitabilist" label is a good, ironic one. Tickled me in the right places. Que sera, sera.