Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Poll: Bush a bigger threat to peace than Saddam
- Thread starter peter2002
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
That is a bizarre reading of Leviathan - I prefer Alain Joxe's reading but I wouldn't call it definitive either.
Of course Rousseau and Hobbes make up a very small sampling of the Philosophes, to say that the totality of American discourse and political thought was moved by one work would entirely unrepresentative; granted though it does make quite the rhetorical flourish.
You ought to know bloody well that one can refer to a history of ideas as an Episteme.
- I was being sarcastic, I should refrain from it. -
Of course Rousseau and Hobbes make up a very small sampling of the Philosophes, to say that the totality of American discourse and political thought was moved by one work would entirely unrepresentative; granted though it does make quite the rhetorical flourish.
You ought to know bloody well that one can refer to a history of ideas as an Episteme.
- I was being sarcastic, I should refrain from it. -
Ok so if Europe & the US were moving in parralell
directions the idea of a radical break is impossible.
If you look at documents like "The Decleration of The Rights of Man" you will find the same set of Ideas mirrored.
The major difference in the documents is the context of application. The Continental model was in its aims to be universal, the American model was to be limited by the context of a nation.
The fracture now is on the issue of the national/international boundary. It is the same set of issues that caused persistent issues for the communist world. For example you can see the early troubles with the Troskyites and again in the fracture between China & the USSR.
directions the idea of a radical break is impossible.
If you look at documents like "The Decleration of The Rights of Man" you will find the same set of Ideas mirrored.
The major difference in the documents is the context of application. The Continental model was in its aims to be universal, the American model was to be limited by the context of a nation.
The fracture now is on the issue of the national/international boundary. It is the same set of issues that caused persistent issues for the communist world. For example you can see the early troubles with the Troskyites and again in the fracture between China & the USSR.
We were starting to get off of the subject - myself to blame too - so your last post is an interesting one. However, I request that you present your thoughts in a more comprehensive manner so that we can read them in context and in the logic of your argument.
I will likewise move beyond the mere recitation of one or two works in an attempt to build an argument that can be defended in a comprehensive manner.
But, I must retire now for the evening, my children demand some of my time and I welcome this time, for it is fleeting....
Thanks. Have a good evening... all of you....
I will likewise move beyond the mere recitation of one or two works in an attempt to build an argument that can be defended in a comprehensive manner.
But, I must retire now for the evening, my children demand some of my time and I welcome this time, for it is fleeting....
Thanks. Have a good evening... all of you....
rebscb
you are right, every country (as a whole, sometimes politicians throw me off...) defends its own interests first. But the question here is: what IS our best interest ? Are we really going to win any battle if we start making more and more 'enemies' around the world ? Isn't it time for a little bit of diplomacy (what a concept) and 'compromise' (the secret ingredient to making peace) ?
Brute force usually fails in the long run.
you are right, every country (as a whole, sometimes politicians throw me off...) defends its own interests first. But the question here is: what IS our best interest ? Are we really going to win any battle if we start making more and more 'enemies' around the world ? Isn't it time for a little bit of diplomacy (what a concept) and 'compromise' (the secret ingredient to making peace) ?
Brute force usually fails in the long run.
1. American Oil companies are already on the jump to take over the oil fields. They are estimated to be worth 2,400 Billion US$. The exile politicians of the Iraq (who are in contact already with the US gov for an after war scenario) already said that existing contracts wouldn't be valid anymore after the country became freed from Saddam and that they would favour US companies. That's the price they pay for being supported by the US. Coincedence? I don't think so. And it is a known "secret" that Dubbya's campaign was sponsered heavily by the american oil industry. He owes them one.
2. It seems I know more about the US economy than you do. The demand for oil in the US will even grow 30% the next 10 years. Cheap energy is the key to keep the US economy alive. The US never tried to get out of that oil-one-way. Carter tried to go for alternative energy sources, but when Reagan came to power all those plans were canceled. Did you never ask yourself why Bush didn't want Kyoto when he said it is not in the national interests of the US? More than any other nation the american economy (still) depends on the oil price. Iraq has the biggest reserves of oil right after Saudi-Arabia. The middle-east holds more than 60% of the world wide oil reserves. If you control that region, you control the oil-prize.
For once just accpet the facts and arguments. It is sad enough that a foreigner has to tell you things that you should know yourself as a "good American".
groovebuster
I personally think we have beat this horse till it is dead, and then kicked it some more. Why not lets just say, "lets wait and see". If you guys are right, I will be the first to call for George's job. If we are right, then hopefully you guys would say, "Man, we were wrong". Lets all agree that we enjoy the freedom of expression that we show here.
That is the feeling that I have at the moment.
That is the feeling that I have at the moment.
Personally I never have a problem to stand corrected. To be wrong about something is part of human nature.
But some people ignore facts that are presented to them just because they don't fit into their narrow-minded view of the world.
I don't think that the "just let's see" attitude is the right way to deal with the situation. Uninformed and narrow-minded individuals are easy to manipulate by the media. And you can't fight a war with the backing of the population. Since there are many (innocent) lifes supposed to die in case of a war, it is a cruel luxury to sit back in your couch and just let things happen.
Our mission should be to always question what the "leaders" are doing and for which purpose, we should question their motivation. No matter if it is the country you are living in or another country in the world. And the first step should be not to think in black and white and the the own country is always a beacon for moral integrity.
I can tell you that I am anything but happy with some stuff the german politicians are doing. But some things are OK nevertheless. And I never made it depending on which party was in power.
Bush as a person doesn't interest me at all, also not if he's republican or democrat. For me counts what he's doing with his team behind him and which goals he tries to achieve. And I am very concerned about it...
If he would at least stop using language in his propaganda that reminds a lot of the language that was user in nazi Germany and stop making this a crusade. To always refer to God in his speeches to the nation doesn't really help either. But that's another subject...
groovebuster
But some people ignore facts that are presented to them just because they don't fit into their narrow-minded view of the world.
I don't think that the "just let's see" attitude is the right way to deal with the situation. Uninformed and narrow-minded individuals are easy to manipulate by the media. And you can't fight a war with the backing of the population. Since there are many (innocent) lifes supposed to die in case of a war, it is a cruel luxury to sit back in your couch and just let things happen.
Our mission should be to always question what the "leaders" are doing and for which purpose, we should question their motivation. No matter if it is the country you are living in or another country in the world. And the first step should be not to think in black and white and the the own country is always a beacon for moral integrity.
I can tell you that I am anything but happy with some stuff the german politicians are doing. But some things are OK nevertheless. And I never made it depending on which party was in power.
Bush as a person doesn't interest me at all, also not if he's republican or democrat. For me counts what he's doing with his team behind him and which goals he tries to achieve. And I am very concerned about it...
If he would at least stop using language in his propaganda that reminds a lot of the language that was user in nazi Germany and stop making this a crusade. To always refer to God in his speeches to the nation doesn't really help either. But that's another subject...
groovebuster