Subject:
|
Re: A question of remembrance...
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Tue, 8 May 2001 12:08:46 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
1717 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Larry Pieniazek writes:
> In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Scott Arthur writes:
> > In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Larry Pieniazek writes:
>
> > > Put it this way, when was the last time you were personally threatened by
> > > the Lichtenstein Army?
> >
> > It does not have one. They rely on the Swiss for defence.
>
> Got me... I did not know that. Pick some other tiny country as the root of
> the example then... one that does have a tiny army.
>
> How about if we use the Grand Duchy of Fenwick, because that's obviously
> fictional. This is a fictional example, intended to be somewhat humourous,
> not intended as an advocacy, and not directed at you anyway.
>
> > > Now if Lichtenstein turns into a pocket dicatorship
> > > that kind of stinks for the Lichtensteiners but it won't last. Bill Gates
> > > could afford to do something about it if he so chose... Hence the thinking
> > > that many small powerless states are good.
>
> > Big business would only do such a thing if there was $$ involved fom them.
> > Individuals would only do such as thing if there was kudos involved.
>
> You don't know what motivates businesses
I do.
> OR people in general,
For people "in general" I do.
> just
> yourself, so you can't say that for sure. I don't think Hemingway went to
> Spain because "there were kudos involved" I think he went because he thought
> standing up against Franco was a needful thing to do.
Well, what were his motives?
>
> > I would
> > rather these sorts of interventions were based on what is right or wrong…
>
> By whose metric?
That is the important question. Many things are clearly "wrong" : mass
murder etc. But at the other edge of the scale it is harder to tell... but
perhaps the need for help is less acute?
>
> The UN just voted the US off the Human Rights Commision while retaining
> Libya, Cuba, Vietnam and a bunch of other dictatorships.
That is news to me.
> Proving once again
> that majority rule can produce screwy results.
Only when the majority is against you. The USA has, I am pretty sure, broken
international law in undertaking acts agaist each the the nations you
mention. I am sure they question the US version of majority rule given the
last election.
> So if you're going to count
> on a transnational organization to determine right or wrong you are not
> going to get good answers. And if it's up to individual nations, how is that
> different than now?
I suppose I trust corrupt government more that corrupt companies. The
former, under the system of government I prefer has some accountability. The
latter, under your preferred system, has none... other than "the market".
Interestingly, there is a move in the UK to have the market change a
multinationals actions:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/business/newsid_1318000/1318360.stm
Scott A
>
> ++Lar
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: A question of remembrance...
|
| (...) Got me... I did not know that. Pick some other tiny country as the root of the example then... one that does have a tiny army. How about if we use the Grand Duchy of Fenwick, because that's obviously fictional. This is a fictional example, (...) (24 years ago, 8-May-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
197 Messages in This Thread:
(Inline display suppressed due to large size. Click Dots below to view.)
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
