A Travel and vacations forum. TravelBanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » TravelBanter forum » Travel Regions » Asia
Site Map Home Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Military Coup in the offing



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #111  
Old March 15th, 2006, 04:45 AM posted to soc.culture.thai,rec.travel.asia,soc.culture.malaysia,soc.culture.singapore
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Military Coup in the offing


ardeedee wrote:

Asians are more attuned to being feudalistic which is inimical to democracy.


That is very correct it seems!

  #112  
Old March 15th, 2006, 12:39 PM posted to soc.culture.thai,rec.travel.asia,soc.culture.malaysia,soc.culture.singapore
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Military Coup in the offing


Pan wrote:
On 14 Mar 2006 03:37:31 -0800, "Liam" wrote:

Benjamin Franklin (I think it was) once said, in paraphrase, that
"Democracy is a suitable form of government only for those who WANT to
be ruled by it. For all others, it is wholly inadequate".

I think that, in the end, the type of government that the people of any
country accept is one that reflects their values.


Dictatorship precisely _does not_ take into account the interests or
values of the people. The people may or may not support a dictatorial
government, but face very strong coercive pressure not to speak out or
take other action.

Thus Representative
Republicanism reflects the values of freedom and self-determination
(America, Great Britain, Australia and the like). Those people who rule
others by tyrannical domination will in the end accept that type of
rule themselves--witness Congo, Zimbabwe and the like.


Where do you get off blaming the people of the Congo and Zimbabwe for
being misruled? And when you bring in the Congo, are you aware of its
history of being raped and murdered by Western imperialists (King
Leopold et al.) and the extent to which that devastation made it very
difficult for the land to recover? The Congo is one of the most
egregious examples of genocide and largescale theft of resources in
history. And now, it's somehow the people's fault that gangs have guns
and shoot them. As for Zimbabwe, there's plenty of resistance to the
depredations of the Mugabe regime, but so far, the coercive power of
the state has staved off the opposition through brutality and
election-rigging.

Despotism--benevolent or otherwise--is successful only in places where
patriarchism is inbred into the culture (Saudi Arabia, etc.). And so
on.


Absolute rule until fairly recently was a universal phenomenon in
state societies.

In the end America works because it reflects the values of the American
people. To be sure, this is never unanimous nor even in most cases
clearly defined. But the process allows for that value to be more or
less paramount. It is not a clear guarantee against evil, incompetence
or profiteering. But it DOES work--to the extent that no matter how
much or how unfairly America is vilified, "the shining city on a hill"
is still an irresistable draw to much of the rest of the world. America
does not have border guards to keep people in, after all.


That's mostly because the economy is still much stronger than most
other economies. We hear less about immigration to relatively
impoverished Costa Rica, though its democracy arguably functions
better than America's.

I do think that you make some good points, and you write well, but you
are overgeneralizing, and apologies in advance if I'm being unfair,
but some of your remarks seem to me to smack of the racist concept of
"Oriental Despotism" as inherent of the "Orient," which is according
to that fabrication ipso facto inherently backward and never subject
to attaining the level of "Western Civilization." There is nothing
inherently "non-Western" about despotism and nothing inherently
"Western" about democracy, though in the latter case, I would readily
admit that inspiration for today's concepts of democracy does mostly
originate from Athenian democracy, the Roman Republic, and writings by
people like Locke -- "Westerners" all.

Michael

If you would like to send a private email to me, please take out the NOTRASH. Please do not email me something which you also posted.


"I do think that you make some good points, and you write well, but you
are overgeneralizing, and apologies in advance if I'm being unfair,
but some of your remarks seem to me to smack of the racist concept of
"Oriental Despotism" as inherent of the "Orient," which is according to
that fabrication ipso facto inherently backward and never subject to
attaining the level of "Western Civilization." There is nothing
inherently "non-Western" about despotism and nothing inherently
"Western" about democracy, though in the latter case, I would readily
admit that inspiration for today's concepts of democracy does mostly
originate from Athenian democracy, the Roman Republic, and writings by
people like Locke -- "Westerners" all."

Hmmmm.

This is not about justice at all, but about values.

Every government, no matter what the type, in the end derives it's
powers from the consent of the governed, be that consent explicit (as
in the form of elections every four years) or implicit. But in the end
that consent can ONLY reflect the values of the society. Therefore a
government implementing Shar'ia, for example, can only work where
Shar'ia is accepted as a cultural norm. Such a government would never
be accepted in places like America, Britain, etc. where such a practice
is absolutely contrary to the values of the people.

You might claim that a dictatorship precludes any kind of decision on
the part of the people, but you'd be wrong. Dictators are a result, not
a cause, and as such nearly always are a PRODUCT of the society or
nation which they rule. Thus the decision is in effect made in advance
of the dictator. Even the most despotic, tyrannical regimes in history
have been thus. Do you think Hitler introduced the concepts of genocide
and racial hatred to Germany? Or the desire to expand eastward? If so,
you'd be wrong. Those "values" were part of the Teutonic culture long
before Hitler appeared on the scene. He merely gave them focus. So too
the rule of such people as Ahmadinejad, Khameini, Mugabe, etc. etc.
These people REFLECT their societies and the values within. They did
not shape them.

People throw off governments that do not reflect their values all the
time, by revolution or whatever means. Virtually every nation in
history can point to multiple revolutions, either orderly (as per the
ballot box) or violent (as per the gun). But in the end the people
always get what they can relate to, even though they may claim that
it's not what they want. They may not admit it, but that's the way it
is.

Liam

  #113  
Old March 15th, 2006, 11:17 PM posted to soc.culture.thai,rec.travel.asia,soc.culture.malaysia,soc.culture.singapore
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Military Coup in the offing

On 15 Mar 2006 03:39:16 -0800, "Liam" wrote:

[snip]
Every government, no matter what the type, in the end derives it's
powers from the consent of the governed, be that consent explicit (as
in the form of elections every four years) or implicit.


That's arrant nonsense. Some governments derive their powers from very
effective terror, not from consent of the governed.

But in the end
that consent can ONLY reflect the values of the society. Therefore a
government implementing Shar'ia, for example, can only work where
Shar'ia is accepted as a cultural norm. Such a government would never
be accepted in places like America, Britain, etc. where such a practice
is absolutely contrary to the values of the people.


You're isolating a particular type of coersion, but that's not the
issue. It's clear that if a dictatorship were to take over the U.S.,
it would claim to be upholding American values such as freedom, much
as is currently happening with the "Patriot" Law and "Homeland
Security" being used to justify illegal spying on the entire populace
and the illegal use of secret evidence, secret blacklisting, and
indefinite detention without trial in violation of a U.S. Supreme
Court ruling. Look at the way Nazism rose in Germany for a good
example.

You might claim that a dictatorship precludes any kind of decision on
the part of the people, but you'd be wrong. Dictators are a result, not
a cause, and as such nearly always are a PRODUCT of the society or
nation which they rule. Thus the decision is in effect made in advance
of the dictator. Even the most despotic, tyrannical regimes in history
have been thus. Do you think Hitler introduced the concepts of genocide
and racial hatred to Germany? Or the desire to expand eastward? If so,
you'd be wrong. Those "values" were part of the Teutonic culture long
before Hitler appeared on the scene. He merely gave them focus. So too
the rule of such people as Ahmadinejad, Khameini, Mugabe, etc. etc.
These people REFLECT their societies and the values within. They did
not shape them.


Wrong. They used propaganda opportunistically as a means to gain
power. In the process, they both reflected and shaped it.

People throw off governments that do not reflect their values all the
time, by revolution or whatever means.


That's very brave talk from you, considering that you don't have to
pay a price for it. So, everyone who clung onto their life in Stalin's
USSR, Hitler's Germany, and Mao's China "consented" to living under a
murderous dictator?

Virtually every nation in
history can point to multiple revolutions, either orderly (as per the
ballot box) or violent (as per the gun). But in the end the people
always get what they can relate to, even though they may claim that
it's not what they want. They may not admit it, but that's the way it
is.


Your bons mots are simplistic and false. It apparently makes you happy
to _believe_ that "in the end the people always get what they can
relate to," but that doesn't make it true, unless the phrase "what
they can relate to" is so meaningless it encompasses the most hated
tyranny.

Michael

If you would like to send a private email to me, please take out the NOTRASH. Please do not email me something which you also posted.
  #114  
Old March 16th, 2006, 05:28 AM posted to soc.culture.thai,rec.travel.asia,soc.culture.malaysia,soc.culture.singapore
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Is Democracy Fair?


Pan wrote:
On 15 Mar 2006 03:39:16 -0800, "Liam" wrote:

[snip]
Every government, no matter what the type, in the end derives it's
powers from the consent of the governed, be that consent explicit (as
in the form of elections every four years) or implicit.


That's arrant nonsense. Some governments derive their powers from very
effective terror, not from consent of the governed.

But in the end
that consent can ONLY reflect the values of the society. Therefore a
government implementing Shar'ia, for example, can only work where
Shar'ia is accepted as a cultural norm. Such a government would never
be accepted in places like America, Britain, etc. where such a practice
is absolutely contrary to the values of the people.


You're isolating a particular type of coersion, but that's not the
issue. It's clear that if a dictatorship were to take over the U.S.,
it would claim to be upholding American values such as freedom, much
as is currently happening with the "Patriot" Law and "Homeland
Security" being used to justify illegal spying on the entire populace
and the illegal use of secret evidence, secret blacklisting, and
indefinite detention without trial in violation of a U.S. Supreme
Court ruling. Look at the way Nazism rose in Germany for a good
example.

You might claim that a dictatorship precludes any kind of decision on
the part of the people, but you'd be wrong. Dictators are a result, not
a cause, and as such nearly always are a PRODUCT of the society or
nation which they rule. Thus the decision is in effect made in advance
of the dictator. Even the most despotic, tyrannical regimes in history
have been thus. Do you think Hitler introduced the concepts of genocide
and racial hatred to Germany? Or the desire to expand eastward? If so,
you'd be wrong. Those "values" were part of the Teutonic culture long
before Hitler appeared on the scene. He merely gave them focus. So too
the rule of such people as Ahmadinejad, Khameini, Mugabe, etc. etc.
These people REFLECT their societies and the values within. They did
not shape them.


Wrong. They used propaganda opportunistically as a means to gain
power. In the process, they both reflected and shaped it.

People throw off governments that do not reflect their values all the
time, by revolution or whatever means.


That's very brave talk from you, considering that you don't have to
pay a price for it. So, everyone who clung onto their life in Stalin's
USSR, Hitler's Germany, and Mao's China "consented" to living under a
murderous dictator?


Below is a thought provoking essay from Peter Hilts the winner of the
Great American Think Off contest: "Is Democracy Fair?"

"Democracy is so fair that it reveals the best and worst qualities of
the people who practice it. As an adoptive parent of three orphaned
children from Ethiopia, I have learned that democracy means much more
than majority rule.

Democracy is not just a political model. It is not simply a way of
casting votes-and it is emphatically not a synonym for the American
system of government. Because it simply means "rule of the people",
democracy is fair if and when it lives up to its own definition. If the
character and values of the people are correctly expressed in their
decisions and institutions, then democracy is fair. Unfortunately,
democracy is often fair to a fault.

In the Ethiopian province of Wolo, in the late 1980's, fair democracy
produced a modern tragedy. While her five children worked and grew
around her, a starving mother tasted the bitter side of democracy. For
more than two thousand years, Ethiopia has practiced self-rule. As an
unconquered nation, rich in tradition, literature and philosophy,
Ethiopians have had many generations to choose their preferred form of
government. Their experience is democratic in the extreme. Ethiopia has
developed a modern government with roots in monarchy, empire and tribal
traditions. Their modern practice includes elections, courts and all
the hallmarks of a modern democracy. Yet in the cradle of that
democracy, a popular ruler tried to subdue a rebellion by starving the
people of the Northern regions. During the resulting political famine,
a mother died and five orphans were cast into a world ill-prepared to
meet their needs. Without a family or local agency to keep them
together, the siblings were split apart.

How can it be that people would choose for themselves a government
opposed to their needs? How could any nation of parents and children
sit by while political leaders traded lives for territory and grain for
guarantees? The painful answer hits closer than we think. Democracy is
fair because participation in democracy is always optional. Political
scientists claim that people always have the government they really
want. However much we might complain about the president or our mayor,
those complaints rarely generate a critical mass of participation in
any given election. During the first major election of this new
century, we can expect over half of eligible voters to stay away from
the polls. From distraction, alienation or simple laziness, that silent
majority will muzzle their own voice in the political process. It this
fair? Absolutely! Is it desirable...?

Those who participate decide. In America, of those who could vote, less
than half will. Of those who vote, a simple majority will decide. Even
then, the will of the voting majority is not secure. In U.S. history we
have more than once let the electoral college override the will of the
electorate. This seems wrong, but it is fair. If Americans truly wanted
a different system, there are vast numbers of inactive citizens who
could rise up and change the system. Their apathy is truly reflected in
a political machine which rewards the active majority, placates the
vocal minority, and ignores the rest.

The people get the government they want. In the wake of that tragic
famine, knowing their resources are limited, Ethiopians have adopted
simple and elegant adoption laws. After a potential adoptive family is
found, the government publishes a notice in national newspapers to give
anyone with an interest in the child a chance to make a claim. After a
short period of time, and absent any claim, the children are joined
with their new family. This is what the people of Ethiopia want, and it
is fair that they have it.

Contrast this with the American system. Before Worku, Lubaba and Saada
came to join our family in Minnesota, we spent nearly 36 months weaving
through a maze of local, state and federal agencies, all of whom had a
series of forms, regulations and processes to impose. Criminal checks
by the city police, federal investigation by the FBI, international
assessments by the CIA and the INS. $35,000 in fees and costs to help
three children rejoin a family eager to give them a home.

My wife and I will raise our new children to love democracy, but that
love will not be blind. They will see that in Ethiopia and America,
democracy honestly reveals our true human nature. We will teach them
that democracy is fair; so fair that it can never be any better than
the people who practice it."
____________________________

Noi




Virtually every nation in
history can point to multiple revolutions, either orderly (as per the
ballot box) or violent (as per the gun). But in the end the people
always get what they can relate to, even though they may claim that
it's not what they want. They may not admit it, but that's the way it
is.


Your bons mots are simplistic and false. It apparently makes you happy
to _believe_ that "in the end the people always get what they can
relate to," but that doesn't make it true, unless the phrase "what
they can relate to" is so meaningless it encompasses the most hated
tyranny.

Michael

If you would like to send a private email to me, please take out the NOTRASH. Please do not email me something which you also posted.


  #115  
Old March 18th, 2006, 02:41 AM posted to soc.culture.thai,rec.travel.asia,soc.culture.malaysia,soc.culture.singapore
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Military Coup in the offing

Tchiowa wrote:
Dave Baker wrote:
On 7 Mar 2006 03:30:21 -0800, "Tchiowa" wrote:

I didn't make up the voting pattern, nor the analysis.

You didn't make up the voting pattern but you certainly made up the
analysis.


Yawn - go & get yourself one of those pretty red & blue maps.

Yes the people on the East Coast and some of the West Coast
voted more Democratic.


Oh, funny - now you want to agree?


Given your history I expected a dishonest reply but this one was beyond
even my wildest expectations. You snipped every bit of the detail;
everything that proved you wrong; everything that exposed your
snobbery, bigotry and elitism and left just enough to make it look like
I said you were right.

Stunningly dishonest.

I wondered before when you were posting all the absurd stuff about
Thailand and Unocal if you were lying or just dumb. I guess you
answered that.


Actually dumb due to dishonest inclination as a result of arrogance.

But it gives us the opportunity to expose these idiocies shared by
people like him.

Unfortunately for you the others in Usenet are capable of reading what
you snipped.

Astounding!


  #116  
Old March 18th, 2006, 05:05 PM posted to soc.culture.thai,rec.travel.asia,soc.culture.malaysia,soc.culture.singapore
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Military Coup in the offing

On 17 Mar 2006 17:41:06 -0800, "Ir. Hj. Othman bin Ahmad"
wrote:

Tchiowa wrote:


Astounding!


Haji & Tchiowa - what a combination! :-)

Dave
  #117  
Old March 23rd, 2006, 12:27 AM posted to soc.culture.thai,rec.travel.asia,soc.culture.malaysia,soc.culture.singapore
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Military Coup in the offing


Ladies and Gentlemen;

Thailand is a very peaceful kingdom, especially when compared to many of
its' neighbors. And because it is a constitutional monarchy with a king
that is revered by the citizens, it retains a great deal of stability even
in the midst of the growning pains that are to be expected of a young
democracy. Even though the kingdom and the culture itself is very old,
Thailand is still comming to terms with the difficulties involved in self
governance ie democracy. It is to be expected that the Thai people will
make numerous mistakes while finding the best possible way to govern
themselves and their country but the good news is that they have begun the
journey and have by an large done a rather good job of it. There are of
course culture differences between East and Western cultures which results
in different governments, different types of democracies etc but that is
good and to be encouraged. Not everyone needs to be alike..

I welcome your civil and literate comments.

Cordially,

Hunter


  #118  
Old March 23rd, 2006, 12:41 AM posted to soc.culture.thai,rec.travel.asia,soc.culture.malaysia,soc.culture.singapore
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Military Coup in the offing


WILLIAM wrote:
Ladies and Gentlemen;

Thailand is a very peaceful kingdom, especially when compared to many of
its' neighbors. And because it is a constitutional monarchy with a king
that is revered by the citizens, it retains a great deal of stability even
in the midst of the growning pains that are to be expected of a young
democracy. Even though the kingdom and the culture itself is very old,
Thailand is still comming to terms with the difficulties involved in self
governance ie democracy. It is to be expected that the Thai people will
make numerous mistakes while finding the best possible way to govern
themselves and their country but the good news is that they have begun the
journey and have by an large done a rather good job of it. There are of
course culture differences between East and Western cultures which results
in different governments, different types of democracies etc but that is
good and to be encouraged. Not everyone needs to be alike..

I welcome your civil and literate comments.

Cordially,

Hunter



67.103.140.34 = [ h-67-103-140-34.lsanca54.covad.net ]
network: Country-Code: US
http://www.EarthLink.net

  #119  
Old March 23rd, 2006, 10:44 AM posted to soc.culture.thai,rec.travel.asia,soc.culture.malaysia,soc.culture.singapore
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Military Coup in the offing

On Wed, 22 Mar 2006 23:27:54 GMT, "WILLIAM"
wrote:


Ladies and Gentlemen;

Thailand is a very peaceful kingdom, especially when compared to many of
its' neighbors.

[snip]

How many of them? Name the countries. OK, I'll start: Burma. And?

Michael

If you would like to send a private email to me, please take out the NOTRASH. Please do not email me something which you also posted.
  #120  
Old March 23rd, 2006, 04:14 PM posted to soc.culture.thai,rec.travel.asia,soc.culture.malaysia,soc.culture.singapore
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Military Coup in the offing

Pan wrote:
On Wed, 22 Mar 2006 23:27:54 GMT, "WILLIAM"
wrote:


Thailand is a very peaceful kingdom, especially when compared to many of
its' neighbors.


How many of them? Name the countries. OK, I'll start: Burma. And?


and cambodia and indonesia and the phillipines...


michael
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
It's True: Burma's Generals Suddenly Shift Capital Burma Action Group Asia 0 November 8th, 2005 01:39 AM
Is an attack on Venezueala Imminent? destiny Latin America 10 September 30th, 2005 04:58 PM
AN EXTRATERRESTRIAL SPEAKS - More on BILLY Meier - Henoch Prophecies - UFOs - Space - Universe... Ed Conrad Europe 4 August 6th, 2005 08:56 PM
Irish European Attitudes towards George Bush Gerald Horgan Europe 37 June 23rd, 2004 10:06 PM
Detained at the whim of the president Polybus Air travel 143 December 28th, 2003 09:54 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 03:35 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 TravelBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.