204 replies to this topic

[Madin]

I'm happy for you.

I am used to my government (British) lying repeatedly and I am used to the media backing those lies up.

[duke_Qa]

Yeah, the British political system is pretty far down on the citizen rights and involvement. Nobility and all that elitist attitude, election systems that bloat the winning parties instead of the small ones, and the near impossibility of getting into politics as an normal person annoys me. I have no clue how you can change all of that without starting some super-popular political party that will sweep the rest off their feet... which I guess was what we were hoping would happen with the lib-dems...oh well, at least they soften the edges of a dark-blue noble-party from doing what they love most.

[Pasidon]

Is anyone really satisfied with their political system, honestly? To sum up the Think Tank recently, all one really needs to say is "Politics is in ruin".

[Hostile]

Yeah, the British political system is pretty far down on the citizen rights and involvement. Nobility and all that elitist attitude, election systems that bloat the winning parties instead of the small ones, and the near impossibility of getting into politics as an normal person annoys me. I have no clue how you can change all of that without starting some super-popular political party that will sweep the rest off their feet... which I guess was what we were hoping would happen with the lib-dems...oh well, at least they soften the edges of a dark-blue noble-party from doing what they love most.

Like the Tea Party did for the conservatives in the US?

[duke_Qa]

The tea party is a reaction one might say, but its imo a regressive one. For me, the Tea Party looks nothing more than a covertly supported rich-man's-minion club, than someone that has any idea of how to improve upon America in a progressive and future-oriented manner. They demand freedom, but where on the scale of "non-vital things we consider vital to freedom" is freedom in this day and age? For me it just sounds like a anarchy group doing their master's bidding in keeping things primitive.

But I admit that they have certainly caused a ruckus, which might just be what the US democratic system needs. Splitting the two-party rut up into smaller parties would perhaps have done some good.

ANYWAY, enough western politics, more Libya and Tripoli, which again seems to be more or less in rebel hands, with the NTC moving in and arranging for rebel guards of museums and whatnot, the compound of Gaddafi has been captured and people seem to be in a good mood. I have to say this has been one of the more successful military operations the UN has allowed, even though we can barely guess at what is going to happen next.

[Madin]

even though we can barely guess at what is going to happen next.

Here is one school of thought. These guys are no generic internet bloggers, their influence is massive and has such, it is a good idea to consider what they say seriously.

http://www.cfr.org/l...n_ground-082211

Edited by Madin, 24 August 2011 - 06:16 AM.

[duke_Qa]

The NTC has been very clear that it wants one Libya ruled from Tripoli, and I think the cathartic effect that have banded the rebels together should be capable of keeping the ship afloat. There will naturally be small fanatical groups that will try to eat as much of the cake as possible, and there will be acts of terror from old Gaddafi beneficiaries. But I heavily suspect that Libya will be able to resume a certain balance of peace while they rebuild their political system.

[Námo]

Offspring of the Arab Spring in Egypt:

MEMRI TV: Footage of Egyptians Demonstrating opposite Israeli Embassy in Cairo Shows Sign with Swastika Saying "The Gas Chambers Are Ready"
(Al-Jazeera TV (Qatar) - August 21, 2011)

The intimate relation between Islamism and Nazism is dating back to the aftermath of World War One, so there is nothing new in such a manifestation. Hitler's 'Mein Kampf' has been one of the bestsellers in the Arabic countries, for decades.

Those who might want further proof of this ideological alliance, read Nazi Palestine: The Plans for the Extermination of the Jews in Palestine by Klaus-Michael Mallmann & Martin Cuppers, based on years of research in the German archives from the Nazi regime.

[duke_Qa]

There's plenty of Egyptian citizens that have been displaced by Israeli occupations. The same way there are thousands of extreme right wingers up here, you'd have to expect there to be thousands of anti-Israeli Islamists down there.

Is anyone really satisfied with their political system, honestly? To sum up the Think Tank recently, all one really needs to say is "Politics is in ruin".

Politics have always been in ruins, but these days we have eyes with High-Def, showing us every wrinkle and zit on its ugly face. It is only a matter of time before those ugly mugs have to be replaced with more reasonable faces.

[Námo]

There's plenty of Egyptian citizens that have been displaced by Israeli occupations. The same way there are thousands of extreme right wingers up here ...

Some facts on anti-semitism:

In the Arab world:

The anti-semitism of the Arabs today goes back almost 1400 years, to the prophet Mohammad, and is sanctioned in the Quran and the Hadith. The intimate relations between Nazi Germany and the Arabs in Palestine were established several decades before the emergence of the state Israel.

In Norway:

Norway today is one of the most anti-semitic nations in Europe, and this even has roots back to Second World War. The treatment of Jews then is certainly nothing the Norwegian people should be proud of.

This anti-semitism (or in Newspeak anti-Zionism) is not the hallmark of "thousands of extreme right wingers", but of the ruling elite and Left-wing party in power, and their supporters. Norway may have been way out of the searchlight of international media, but with the recent focus on the country this dark side of Norwegian society will also receive more focus.

If one doesn't learn from history, it has a tendency to repeat itself, and there's nothing new in the left's support of anti-semitism. Remember the words of Hitler: "How, as a socialist, can you not be anti-semite?"

Modern socialist ought to pay proper respect to the works of their founding fathers, and attend to what they actually said and did, not what their modern disciples wish they had said. A recommendation for getting the historical facts right:

The Nazi ideology (National Socialism) was basically a socialist ideology, which becomes clear also if you go into the details on their economic policies. Hitler claimed that "the whole of National Socialism" was based on Marx, and there's a common theoretical basis of the beliefs of Stalin and Hitler which led to death camps. The imperialistic nature of the Nazi nationalism also has a lot in common with the Third Internationale of Communist Soviet Russia, and we find the same political aspirations in modern day EUSSR.

[Puppeteer]

There's plenty of Egyptian citizens that have been displaced by Israeli occupations. The same way there are thousands of extreme right wingers up here ...

Some facts on anti-semitism:

In the Arab world:

The anti-semitism of the Arabs today goes back almost 1400 years, to the prophet Mohammad, and is sanctioned in the Quran and the Hadith. The intimate relations between Nazi Germany and the Arabs in Palestine were established several decades before the emergence of the state Israel.

In Norway:

Norway today is one of the most anti-semitic nations in Europe, and this even has roots back to Second World War. The treatment of Jews then is certainly nothing the Norwegian people should be proud of.

This anti-semitism (or in Newspeak anti-Zionism) is not the hallmark of "thousands of extreme right wingers", but of the ruling elite and Left-wing party in power, and their supporters. Norway may have been way out of the searchlight of international media, but with the recent focus on the country this dark side of Norwegian society will also receive more focus.

If one doesn't learn from history, it has a tendency to repeat itself, and there's nothing new in the left's support of anti-semitism. Remember the words of Hitler: "How, as a socialist, can you not be anti-semite?"

Modern socialist ought to pay proper respect to the works of their founding fathers, and attend to what they actually said and did, not what their modern disciples wish they had said. A recommendation for getting the historical facts right:

The Nazi ideology (National Socialism) was basically a socialist ideology, which becomes clear also if you go into the details on their economic policies. Hitler claimed that "the whole of National Socialism" was based on Marx, and there's a common theoretical basis of the beliefs of Stalin and Hitler which led to death camps. The imperialistic nature of the Nazi nationalism also has a lot in common with the Third Internationale of Communist Soviet Russia, and we find the same political aspirations in modern day EUSSR.

Not only are you blatantly glossing over the distinction between anti-Semitism and anti-Zionism (which has been reiterated many times before) but you are confusing the economic policy of 'socialism' with the socio-political system of 'socialism'.

To say that some of Hitler's policies were socialist is also quite untrue - the workers were never intended to own the means of production, the whole idea of lowering unemployment was the Keynesian continuation of von Schleicher's/von Papen's autobahn and rearmament programme (a modern Liberal programme based on moderation and capitalist boom & bust cycles), and that workers were still intended to sell their labour as a commodity. The elements you call socialist are not socialist, merely interventionist. That's not socialism. There is a distinction - you can't just make socialism and anything sounding interventionist or leftist synonymous.

The article also points out that the government was the de facto owner of business enterprises. Whilst it's true about most armaments, where the leadership was changed or contracts were forced, it's not true about others. In a wartime economy, since Goering took over the economic policies from Hjalmar Schacht, any government, regardless of political system, regulates and controls the key sectors to maximise and prioritise defence and military production. You can't then start bandying around the word 'socialism' when it's in the wrong context, when it's temporary, and when it's not about unifying means of production rather coordinating the ends of production.

Also fascism is a synthesis of ideologies, and if you had to say one predominated, it was not socialist or capitalist, but corporatist and oligarchical, as seen in Mussolini's Italy. You also cannot take Hitler's statements as fact - if had said he was running a liberal democracy built on Sikh values, you would dismiss this as a propaganda attempt to garner the favour of Western Sikhs. Similarly here - Hitler appealed to the workers, but it was pretty clear that after the first 'revolution', the SA had to be decapitated to prevent socialist elements of the party from progressing.

Also, the elements of similarity to the Third International are not the socialist elements, but the wartime nationalism.

Stop throwing around terms without actually knowing anything about their definitions and the contexts. This is not the first time when I have had to correct your speeches on Nazi comparisons.

[duke_Qa]

I'm starting to think I got to get mah shotgun out on the porch and ask puppeteer about his educational background

I don't really have anything to say about the reply, it puts it in much better words than my own. Nazism never was and will never be "socialistic", it was fascistic, authoritarian, tyrannical and corporation-oriented with the philosophy that people were sheep that were either loyal, slaves or fertilizer.

Edited by duke_Qa, 26 August 2011 - 12:08 PM.

[Madin]

So the special forces (on the ground) and the 'freedom fighters', the name given to guerilla groups and terrorist when the west are backing their cause, are finally free to commit the country to sharia law.

The account of how much ground level involvement the west had in the 'organic' uprising is reasonably treated with suspicion by anyone with a brain that functions.


http://www.telegraph...aeda-links.html

http://online.wsj.co...oWhatsNewsThird

http://www.guardian....uk.davidshayler

Edited by Madin, 31 August 2011 - 09:04 PM.

[duke_Qa]

It's probably easy to find a smuck to say he wants sharia-law in a Saudi-Arabic Wahabi style. I believe most pro-revolutionaries are more pro-country than pro-Islam, and Libya never was very secular, alcohol being illegal and honor killings aplenty. I doubt they have much fuel for such a fire.

[Madin]

Your confused. The rebel leaders have stated that their constitution will be sharia based.
http://blog.heritage...of-legislation/

In other news: Ethnic based actions from the glorious Al-queda 'freedom-fighters' (formerly known has terrorist)
http://www.google.co...2d8434904e9233b
http://www.independe...al-2344671.html

Above is the mild stuff, there is much more grim evidence for those willing to look pass the embarrassing reporting of the likes of the BBC.
Like I said "A bloody civil conflict or an ethnic cleansing is all but guaranteed".

[duke_Qa]

There is Sharia and there is sharia. Iran is the better example of a theocracy, and they are Not very popular with any of the Sunni-based countries around them. The next best thing is the Saudis, which we seem to have very little problem cooperating with...EVEN though they are the definition of a Sharia-run-amok nation. The corrupt benefactors of the royal family have allowed the big wahhabi-cults to do as they please as long as they kept their hands on the throats of suppressed women off their greedy ways.

What Sharia means in those more distant nations of the Arab kingdom, is a ban on alcohol and keeping decadence at a minimum. There is no sharia law that says democracy is a sin unto God or something. That's what the Iranians might say.

[duke_Qa]

Guess an update is in order, considering the fate of Gaddafi yesterday. He was apparently caught and then killed in a "shootout", but videos show more or less a lynching. I am neutral to the way he died, it is somewhat understandable that emotions were flying high at the time. But if he was caught alive it seems a bit sloppy.

The videos and images from the event will be very important symbols for the Arabs though. There is no doubt that it makes the other dictators worry a bit more about their options. Also, it is fascinating to think that its only been 8 months and a dictator has gone from full power to civil war to total defeat.

The death of Muammar Gaddafi is a pleasant surprise. I hate to say it that way, but this is a dictator who has shown that he really was going to fight to the death. It certainly hails the start of a new Libya. And of course it signifies something extraordinary: the fall of three dictators in less than 10 months in North Africa in the context of what is going on in the Middle East. 2011 is an extraordinary year for the region. The death of Gaddafi will tell other autocrats in the region that their days are numbered. It should tell them that the use of violence and force against their own people can only be effective for so long. There are all different situations, and of course specifically for Bashar al-Assad and Ali Abdullah Saleh, for example, have been using their security forces for quite some time. But at the end of the day, if we do get into a situation where they are not able to reach accommodation with their own people, and the people will not stop, as seems apparent in both Syria and Yemen, things have to change.

Edited by duke_Qa, 21 October 2011 - 06:23 AM.

[Romanul]

This is where the journey actually begins.

I bet that until Libya will become a REAL democratic country, it will take somewhere between 20 and 50 years.

In Romania at least, it took us 2 decades. And it's still not democracy. And it's the same scenario happening again.

On the lulz side: France bought from the CNT about 35% of their oil. Dunno if I mentioned this.

[Pasidon]

So is this when we drop our negative feelings toward Libya and celebrate a new-found democracy yet?

[Námo]

Time for an Islamic republic? Tribal conflicts? Ethnic cleansing?