volfanhill
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Jan 5, 2011
- Messages
- 35,027
- Likes
- 61,271
You keep saying us and we. Methinks you're like a few species of bird that puff up and span their feathers in order to appear larger.Of course it is okay for us to criticize our leadership.
However, we tend to draw the line at slobbering over another nation's leader. Which you do...often...obsessively often.
So if Russia is so awesome and wonderful, move there. What is stopping you?
I could make the case that right now, the US is more corrupt, run by more powerful oligarchs and is more socialist today than Russia is right now.
You keep saying us and we. Methinks you're like a few species of bird that puff up and span their feathers in order to appear larger.
I see his point. The line you just drew is arbitrary. If we're so close minded and stupid as to think we are the best at everything and there is nothing to admire about other countries, then there are no discussions here worth having.
I disagree about the new age communism. I think Putin's government is leading Russia towards a neo-fascist state. It's not nearly as over-the-top in its rhetoric/ideologies or as hell bent on conquest as its European forbears of the interwar period, but it retains much of that movement's basic principles. Perhaps a better term for this recent trend (and we've seen it elsewhere recently too, in places like Hungary, Turkey, and in European far right movements) would be "New Fascism," since it is staunchly socially conservative, statist, ethnocentric (though not as severely as Old Fascism was), andro-fixated (masculinity is championed and the strength of the male body eroticized), and revanchist/irredentist to some degree.
I think of the New Fascism, spearheaded by Putin, as the contemporary "enlightened" man's version of fascism, by which I mean that no rational "enlightened" man nowadays could support the endless and unabated raw genocidal and violent expansionism of the Old Fascism. But he could conceivably get behind "watered-down" versions of its ethnocentric and androcentric ideas that provide him with a convincing narrative as to how he and his country have been wronged and how his country can reclaim its rightful place at the table of nations.
Ras's point is ridiculous. It's a straw man. No one here unabashedly supports all-things America or the US govt. We're highly critical of these things, some more than others, collectively. That's the primary point of this entire thread. If it weren't, we wouldn't be here, to your point.
Grand's point, however, is that, while critical of the US, Ras (and others like him) is never critical of other governments and societies, like that of contemporary Russia. If other places are so great and America is so corrupt and hell bent on its collective destruction, then moving elsewhere is a simple and obvious alternative in such a case.
You keep saying us and we. Methinks you're like a few species of bird that puff up and span their feathers in order to appear larger.
I see his point. The line you just drew is arbitrary. If we're so close minded and stupid as to think we are the best at everything and there is nothing to admire about other countries, then there are no discussions here worth having.
I am not arguing the merits of American government. I am arguing the issues of the Russian political system. I agree that the American political system in its current form is all sorts of messed up.
Catalonias push for independence from Spain is illegitimate, as the region has not been recognized by the United Nations as a non-autonomous territory, UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon told Spanish media.
When one speaks of self-determination, certain areas have been recognized by the United Nations as non-autonomous territories. But Catalonia does not fall into this category, Ban said in an interview with Spanish newspapers El Pais, El Mundo, ABC and La Vanguardia.
Since the beginning of decolonization after World War II, the UN has considered non-autonomous those territories that are geographically separate and distinct ethnically and culturally from the country, which is administrating them.
So is I either highlight the point that America could be far better or if I comment on how another country may be doing certain things right compared to us, does that mean that I need to leave the country?
I've often bad mouthed some folks in my family for doing stupid things, but that doesn't mean I want out of the family. It just means that I want family to do better... same is true with my comments regarding the US or any other country.
We have been sailing those waters since ww2. Suddenly china changes the map and we are invading "sovereign territory"I'm just wondering if you needed to put a weapon to their head in making your argument(cruising a destroyer by disputed islands) or did diplomatic discussion usually settle the matter one way or the other?