| FORUM | ARCHIVE |                    | TOTAL QUIZ RESULT |


  New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - Historical Continuity, Large Systems and Future
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login


Welcome stranger, click here to read about some of the great benefits of registering for a free account with us and joining us in our global online community.


Historical Continuity, Large Systems and Future

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  123 8>
Author
eventhorizon View Drop Down
Baron
Baron


Joined: 21 Aug 2008
Status: Offline
Points: 432
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote eventhorizon Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Topic: Historical Continuity, Large Systems and Future
    Posted: 19 Nov 2009 at 05:01
This is a continuation of an old thread which is now in archives:

http://www.allempires.net/historical-continuity-large-systems-and-future_topic25297_page1.html



This is a documentary on ending poverty, the synopsis of this project:
http://www.theendofpoverty.com/synopsis.html

"

SYNOPSIS

Global poverty did not just happen. It began with military conquest, slavery and colonization that resulted in the seizure of land, minerals and forced labor. Today, the problem persists because of unfair debt, trade and tax policies -- in other words, wealthy countries taking advantage of poor, developing countries.

Renowned actor and activist, Martin Sheen, narrates The End of Poverty?, a feature-length documentary directed by award-winning director, Philippe Diaz, which explains how today's financial crisis is a direct consequence of these unchallenged policies that have lasted centuries. Consider that 20% of the planet's population uses 80% of its resources and consumes 30% more than the planet can regenerate. At this rate, to maintain our lifestyle means more and more people will sink below the poverty line.

Filmed in the slums of Africa and the barrios of Latin America, The End of Poverty? features expert insights from: Nobel prize winners in Economics, Amartya Sen and Joseph Stiglitz; acclaimed authors Susan George, Eric Toussaint, John Perkins, Chalmers Johnson; university professors William Easterly and Michael Watts; government ministers such as Bolivia's Vice President Alvaro Garcia Linera and the leaders of social movements in Brazil, Venezuela, Kenya and Tanzania . It is produced by Cinema Libre Studio in collaboration with the Robert Schalkenbach Foundation.

Can we really end poverty within our current economic system? Think again.

The film has been selected to over 25 international film festivals and will be released in theatres in November 2009. Directed by Philippe Diaz, produced by Cinema Libre Studio with the Robert Schalkenbach Foundation, 104mins, 2008, USA, documentary in English, Spanish, French with English Subtitles.

Short Version:

The End of Poverty? is a daring, thought-provoking and very timely documentary by award-winning filmmaker, Philippe Diaz, revealing that poverty is not an accident. It began with military conquest, slavery and colonization that resulted in the seizure of land, minerals and forced labor. Today, global poverty has reached new levels because of unfair debt, trade and tax policies -- in other words, wealthy countries exploiting the weaknesses of poor, developing countries.

The End of Poverty? asks why today 20% of the planet's population uses 80% of its resources and consumes 30% more than the planet can regenerate?

The film has been selected to over 25 international film festivals and will be released in theatres in November 2009. Directed by Philippe Diaz, produced by Cinema Libre Studio with the Robert Schalkenbach Foundation, 104mins, 2008, USA, documentary in English, Spanish, French with English Subtitles."



I think finally we are getting somewhere, people are realizing that mickey mouse efforts of helping a few villages by NGO's are heroic and commendable, but that will not solve the problem in a comprehensive way, what we need to do is build superstructures that will bring change.

Poverty is symptom of disrupted social entities, that have not been able to heal themselves sufficiently and are falling behind in competition with other undisrupted societies or other societies which are larger in size and have greater economies of scale. I consider two factors to be the most important for survival of societies in competition with other societies, one is level of internal disruption due to historic invasion, occupation and subjugation and the other is size of population and economy and the resulting economies of scale.

Today's poverty alleviation programs do not attack the root cause of the problem, which is non-competitiveness of the suffering societies and how they can get back the competitive edge and return to a level playing field.

There is not much we can do about reversing the historical disruption, but Regional groups putting countries together, which were formerly within one empire, should help, I believe, so will creating larger continent wide Unions such as European Union. NGO projects working to improve lives will help somewhat, but creating the superstructures, where a country like China could change the fate of a billion people in a few decades are what is needed. I am not promoting communism, but rather, any indigenous system with long history in the region, that could keep historical units together, bring them closer as they were in earlier times and thus heal the disruption as much as possible. Regional integration will also create larger economies at the same time, which would facilitate greater economies of scale.

The looming global climatic catastrophe is of course another problem that shows how misguided the past few hundred years have been in human affairs.

To put it bluntly, it is the rich countries who have created the disruption, climatic, environmental and social, so they should take the lead in putting the house back in order. Unfortunately, taking responsibility is not a very human characteristic, I must say with sadness.

Instead of having the highest sought after achievement as making the most amount of money, having the biggest car and house, the ideal of achievement should be to understand our world, act responsibly to preserve its future and to make do with as little as possible, IMHO.



Edited by eventhorizon - 01 Apr 2010 at 07:04
Back to Top
Sponsored Links


Back to Top
eventhorizon View Drop Down
Baron
Baron


Joined: 21 Aug 2008
Status: Offline
Points: 432
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote eventhorizon Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 27 Nov 2009 at 05:04
On Nidal Malik Hasan:

I have made the following comments on some newspaper article comment section. Some statements are inflammatory and could be flame bait, I am not sure. But I reproduce them here verbatim in Fox news style opinionated pieces, if the moderators find any of the statements offensive to any particular group or ethnic group, then please ask me to modify and correct those statements so that they are not offensive.

1.

Man is supposed to be a rational being, but faith, belief, upbringing, history all color our minds and perceptions. It is not logical to have so many languages, cultures, religions and countries, but here we are. It is because we are living history and we do not want to give up our historical baggage. Even when we communicate someone says something but it is most often taken in a different way by another with a different background. In brief, we are steeped with history, every one of us and it is hard for any human being to communicate clearly with others who are from a different culture.

That said, I will give a brief outline of the origin of modern Islamic terrorism. Arabs betrayed the Turks and broke up Ottoman empire with help of Britain and France at WW I. Arabs gain oil money, but also get problems like Palestine, and are so weak that they cannot even collectively fight off a small state like Israel. Arab states were born at the hands of the West and are still beholden to them for security and sustenance. Note where all oil money go for investment, mostly to US and Europe. But the backward Arab mindset such as the wahabi combined with oil money and egyptian intellectuals from brotherhood movement become a potent combination.

A little towards east in South Asia, the historic Mughal and then British empire broke up in partition, gave rise to India and some unstable Muslim states in the name of Pakistan. Afghanistan that was closely associated with South Asia, became a buffer between British India and Soviet Central Asia and eventually becomes an orphan state specially after partition in 1947. Left alone and peaceful for some decades, Russia tries to take it in its hand in 1979, but the US with the help of the above mentioned potent combination whip up the Afghans with no small help from a Islamic seminary in Deobond, India. Mullahs such trained now train Afghan mindset for Jihad against the Russians. Here in this cauldron Al Quaeda and the future Taliban is born. Note that along with CIA, Arab mindset and oil money is heavily involved in this mix. It might be worth while to mention that oil money by this time has taken wahabi creed to all mosques in all corners of the world.

The way I see it, it is not Muslims or Islam that is the problem here, it is a volatile backward Arab mind fueled with a sudden injection of oil wealth that is exploding on the face of the planet. Note who are the 9/11 perpetrators, all Arabs, note Hasan, a Palestinian Arab, note all the violence where ever in the name of Islam, people trained in this recent so called "Islamic" but in reality Arab ideologies such as Wahabi, Brotherhood and of course Al Quaeda. I may sound like an Arab hater, but one cannot escape the fact. None of this ideologies originate in any other Muslim lands and only 13% of Muslim population is Arab. My advice to all Muslim countries would be to watch the Arabs and people who stayed in Arab countries for sometime with eagle eye.

What caused Arabs to be in this morass, while they were supposed to have a high civilization 1000 years ago, again history, ever since advent of Turks and Mongols in the Islamic world, the Arab civilization was destroyed and Arabs relegated to second class citizens, while Arab lands became back waters, with the exception of Mecca for obvious reasons. Sudden oil wealth could not change that backward mindset grown over a millennium.

Again I emphasize, the source of this global problem is the historic core Arab land of KSA, Egypt and surrounding countries, so instead of killing Iraqi's or Afghans, the focus should be there for the whole world including for rest of Muslim people.

Talking about Palestine, they are a part of Arab people and brought it on themselves when they decided to betray the Turk Ottoman empire and stab them in the back, now they are reaping the bitter fruits. Now they want to involve and drag the rest of Muslim people in their mess, I don't understand why the other Muslims are so confused not to see through all this.

As far as I can see, there is no great conflict between most of the Muslim people of the world, the West and the rest of the world, but the Arab Muslims seemed to have made not just a mess for themselves, but also for other Muslims and also their original benefactors, the West who came and freed them from the clutch of Ottoman Turks, where they should have stayed and spared the rest of the world all this trouble.

My funny 2 cents, lets see what people has to say about this.

2.

It is yet to be seen if Man is any more than specs in the universe, whether the neurons are made of "living cells", transistors or future synthetic living cells that will be designed in labs.

Islam is a world religion, an ideology, just like many other world religions, that were imperial creeds used by imperial dynasties for better administration of empires. The same thing could be said about Christianity, Buddhism and Hinduism. Without this connection between empire and religion it seems no religion or ideology gained sufficient following. Same thing could be said about communism which was taken up by Russians and Han Chinese to spread their empire. None were perfect and so is Islam, each evolved in its own space with unique historical dynamics. To hold and judge one with criteria of another is futile and this was my point about misunderstanding and difficulty of communication between cultures.

The symptoms of barbarism (honor killing, suicide bombing etc.) that you quote are often symptomatic of broken down disrupted society and could not keep up and evolve with times and may have very little to do with this or that religion/ideology.

I will ask you this, how many of US strategists in CIA and State Dept. payroll have a full grasp of the implications of what I have just mentioned, why the trillions spent in Iraq and Afghanistan where the source of the problem is somewhere else? Talk about confusion.

3.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suicide_attack#Suicide_terrorism_and_suicide_bombing

Please look at the history, Muslims picked it up recently in the past few decades.

My point is not about people lacking historical and cultural perspective, rather that it is natural and human to misunderstand other cultures, because cultures evolved in isolated corners of the world and are essentially alien to each other. Our brains developing neuronal hard wired connections at early age and reaching maturity by 25 may have something to do with it.

If Hasan grew up in a white Christian family, he would definitely have different brain map, but he grew up with his Palestinian parents, inherited all their baggage and then some more while he attended mosques (listening to wahabi funded Mullahs and Imams), chose to remain in the Muslim world and not break out of it. Even a US upbringing could not break him out of the cycle of backwardness and confusion that Arabs inherited from a millennium of Turko-mongol domination.

But the main point of my original post is that the source of the viral ideas that has gone ballistic are not part of historic Islam and the source is not in Iraq or in Afghanistan, rather they are in the Wahabi Kingdom of al Sauds (kingdom of Saudi Arabia), Arab Republic of Egypt (both US and Western allies at least on the surface), Palestine as well as some smaller Gulf Arab countries. The ideas have come out of a disruptive situation that was created by the British and French when they used Arabs to break up the Ottoman empire. So IMHO, it is rather an Arab-Western problem and conflict, where the rest of Muslims of the world have been dragged into it against their will, partly because they are confused and partly because wahabi's are spreading their venom and confusion via every mosque in the world using oil money (thanks again to the British and the French) and funding the Mullah's and Imam's in these mosques. Talk to any non-Arab Muslim and they will tell you what I am talking about. Iraqi's, though mostly Arabs, were not involved in this and Afghanistan, its just a joke, these simple minded people had no idea what they were getting into when their young sons were going to Madrassas in the refugee camps in Pakistan after Soviet invasion. These future Taliban later provided refuge and working space for Al Qaeda, the wahabi's by then had successfully trained a generation of Taliban who now were sympathetic to wahabi cousin Al Qaeda.

There is no simple solution. But I will share an idea with people. Many I am sure have seen the science fiction movie "The Fifth Element". IMHO when the two empires were broken up, the Ottoman and British India, the fifth element that went missing are the Turks in middle east and Hindus in South Asia from the Muslim majority countries there, if people of the world really want to solve these problems then these fifth elements need to be brought back so the regions can get back some of the old dynamics that evolved over centuries and were rudely disrupted for Ottoman in 1917 and the sub-continent in 1947.

The US knowing next to nothing of these regions, trying to poke its nose where it does not belong, using blunt instrument like American GI's will only exacerbate the problems, like it did in Iraq, where a Shia crescent has been created strengthening Iran's hand and thus introducing a new source of regional instability. Iraq had made the US half bankrupt and Afghanistan will manage to bankrupt the US completely.

What we do not know can hurt us greatly, if any of my assertions are correct then think how far the US have traveled on the wrong path.




Edited by eventhorizon - 30 Nov 2009 at 02:45
Back to Top
Joze View Drop Down
Janissary
Janissary


Joined: 06 Nov 2009
Location: Slowenia
Status: Offline
Points: 29
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Joze Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 27 Nov 2009 at 20:41
Hi! Yes,  in this topic  i  can  find   some analogies with  my text,   here:
 
I  am   sory that  the   world history goes in  this  direction.... :( It  will   be   much   better to  live  in   peace  and   harmony together!
 
Edit:   aha  -  i   find Edit. buttom :)   well,   what  i   am  trying  to   say,  is: the   all  world-history since Greek's rationalistic's philosophy   aims goes in  the direction,  to  the place,   where   we   are   today.   Here is wrong  to   say -  yust  one    land,   yust   one   country  is worse,   has   a   bad   politic-perspective,  etc ....   WE  ALL are in  the   same world situation  in the place, of  our  living's style,   ettitude   and  our living-ways in  our   countryies. This  old  traditional  claims   to   change   is   very  difficult  work! It  is   very   naive   and   wrong  to   say: xy  country   make   big   mistake   and  is   bad country ......   becouse  the   origins  for   this situations  are  very   very   old and  the   real   origins are   much   much   deeper... they are  in   our own personally-structure wich became the product  of   our all social-systemes in  the   past. The   ethical norms  and   aims are the   most  important goal in   our  lives&but the interpretations  of  this  sphere are in different  lands not  the   same.
Hope   you  understand   me - i   write   very   bad and   without a   dictionary.
 
Regards,   Joze
 
Joze


Edited by Joze - 27 Nov 2009 at 20:54
Best regards!
Back to Top
eventhorizon View Drop Down
Baron
Baron


Joined: 21 Aug 2008
Status: Offline
Points: 432
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote eventhorizon Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 28 Nov 2009 at 03:44
Originally posted by Joze Joze wrote:

Hi! Yes,  in this topic  i  can  find   some analogies with  my text,   here:
 
I  am   sory that  the   world history goes in  this  direction.... :( It  will   be   much   better to  live  in   peace  and   harmony together!
 
Edit:   aha  -  i   find Edit. buttom :)   well,   what  i   am  trying  to   say,  is: the   all  world-history since Greek's rationalistic's philosophy   aims goes in  the direction,  to  the place,   where   we   are   today.   Here is wrong  to   say -  yust  one    land,   yust   one   country  is worse,   has   a   bad   politic-perspective,  etc ....   WE  ALL are in  the   same world situation  in the place, of  our  living's style,   ettitude   and  our living-ways in  our   countryies. This  old  traditional  claims   to   change   is   very  difficult  work! It  is   very   naive   and   wrong  to   say: xy  country   make   big   mistake   and  is   bad country ......   becouse  the   origins  for   this situations  are  very   very   old and  the   real   origins are   much   much   deeper... they are  in   our own personally-structure wich became the product  of   our all social-systemes in  the   past. The   ethical norms  and   aims are the   most  important goal in   our  lives&but the interpretations  of  this  sphere are in different  lands not  the   same.
Hope   you  understand   me - i   write   very   bad and   without a   dictionary.
 
Regards,   Joze
 
Joze


I think I understand you, I welcome you to read the archived link at the top post where I present my theory and analysis of world situation. Yes I can see that you have somewhat similar ideas. I think all social systems, large or small should be left alone as much as possible and be allowed to accept change voluntarily on their own terms, changes should not be imposed from the outside, which causes irreparable harm to a social system that has evolved over many thousands of years and helped the survival and sustenance of its constituents.

Much of today's conflict and poverty are the result of badly disrupted social systems, that got disrupted by other larger or dominant more powerful social units.

As for the link you provided about a preferred world order, I have already presented my preference for such an order, which are:

- regional groups to unite and merge together countries with some common history
- continent wide Unions, which will further unite above regional groups
- finally a global union of continent wide unions

One of the fundamental priorities of these groups would be to preserve and protect vulnerable communities large like Tibetans and Uighurs from Han Chinese aggressions, small like the Andamanese and Sentinelese in the Andaman Nicobar islands, from native Indian migrants.

For regional groups, I prefer the following:

ASEAN, SAARC, CAU (Central Asian Union), GCC etc. in ASIA
AU in Africa
EU in Europe
US-Canada Union in NA
Mercusor including Mexico in South and Central America

Eventually I would like to see an Asian Union and an European Union to cover all countries in Eurasian and Oceania land mass, AU in Africa and an American Union for all North, Central and South American countries.

Management of countries was difficult before due to lack of information and method of monitoring, today we have increasingly powerful technology to manage larger more complex systems. That is why I propose that we should leave behind nation states and go for larger and larger units, in phases through trial and error. EU's success as a test case will show the way for all others, but due to difference in regions, every region will have to try and find their own unique path towards integration.

These are the super structures, that I believe will end injustice, poverty and all other ill effects of centuries of ill behavior of some particular groups, the effect of which is still suffered by a large portion of humanity today. It will also lay the foundation for global planetary management of resources and value systems that will be able to help bring humanity to some balance about how to live on this planet without destroying their own nest, cleanup the mess, keep it intact and even make it better for future generations of humanity.

I welcome any questions or comments from you and others.
Back to Top
eventhorizon View Drop Down
Baron
Baron


Joined: 21 Aug 2008
Status: Offline
Points: 432
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote eventhorizon Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 29 Nov 2009 at 06:49
Lately a friend of mine brought up Bilderbergers as a source of all existing or past troubles of the world, which is kind of a reincarnation of 5000 year old masonic order.

About Bilderbergers, they want one world govt., which is a good goal, but they are foolish to think that its possible to destroy existing structures and create one world govt. in near future.

My difference with Bilderbergers is that my vision is to preserve the existing idea superstructure memes (Christianity, Islam, Hinduism, Judaism, capitalism, socialism, communism, buddhism, neoconfucianism etc.) small and large and let them evolve over time in their own terms, rather than trying to destroy them. This can be ensured in the regional groupings where dissimilar and mutually unfamiliar and foreign major memes will be kept apart for significant amount of time before they are ready for closer integration in a collection of continent wide unions and eventually in a global union far in the future. The idea is to choose evolution over disruption, to avoid negative effects on society.

I do not think the Bilderbergers have evil intentions, in general they mean well, but they are not knowledgeable enough or have a full grasp of planetary affairs that they are discussing on. As a result, some of their visions and goals are misguided.
Back to Top
drgonzaga View Drop Down
King
King
Avatar
Plus Ultra

Joined: 02 Oct 2005
Status: Offline
Points: 6262
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote drgonzaga Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 29 Nov 2009 at 07:53
Shades of Angels and Demons!
Honi soit qui mal y pense
Back to Top
eventhorizon View Drop Down
Baron
Baron


Joined: 21 Aug 2008
Status: Offline
Points: 432
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote eventhorizon Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 29 Nov 2009 at 09:52
Originally posted by drgonzaga drgonzaga wrote:

Shades of Angels and Demons!


I guess most things in the world come as mixed bags, but what specifically are you referring to, this topic itself, myself or something else, would appreciate if you could elaborate further.
Back to Top
drgonzaga View Drop Down
King
King
Avatar
Plus Ultra

Joined: 02 Oct 2005
Status: Offline
Points: 6262
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote drgonzaga Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 29 Nov 2009 at 15:40
Management of countries was difficult before due to lack of information and method of monitoring, today we have increasingly powerful technology to manage larger more complex systems. That is why I propose that we should leave behind nation states and go for larger and larger units, in phases through trial and error. EU's success as a test case will show the way for all others, but due to difference in regions, every region will have to try and find their own unique path towards integration.

I do believe you need to view an old Sci-fi pic premised on H.G. Wells, Things to Come and then read 1984. In fact in terms of governance and society, the pressures have been in the other direction: to smaller and more cohesive entities. Empires and "world" societies are disintegrating and only the truly foolish blather on about the "global village". Most people do not want to be "managed" and the notion that one size fits all sounds like a nightmare drawn from Soviet consumer production in the 1950s. Social change is always a function of Time and not some cockamamie intellectualization that gives birth to Utopia.
 
"Methods of monitoring" indeed! Didn't that use to go by the name of Secret Police!


Edited by drgonzaga - 30 Nov 2009 at 02:28
Honi soit qui mal y pense
Back to Top
eventhorizon View Drop Down
Baron
Baron


Joined: 21 Aug 2008
Status: Offline
Points: 432
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote eventhorizon Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 29 Nov 2009 at 16:52
Originally posted by drgonzaga drgonzaga wrote:

Management of countries was difficult before due to lack of information and method of monitoring, today we have increasingly powerful technology to manage larger more complex systems. That is why I propose that we should leave behind nation states and go for larger and larger units, in phases through trial and error. EU's success as a test case will show the way for all others, but due to difference in regions, every region will have to try and find their own unique path towards integration.

I do believe you need to view an old Sci-fi pic premised on H.G. Wells, Things to Come and then read 1984. In fact in terms of governance and society, the pressures have been in the other direction: to smaller and more cohesive entities. Empires and "world" societies are disintegrating and only the truly foolish blather on about the "global village". Most people do not want to be "managed" and the notion that onse size fits all sounds like a nightmare drawn from Soviet consumer production in the 1950s. Social change is always a function of Time and not some cockamamie intellectualization that gives birth to Utopia.
 
"Methods of monitoring" indeed! Didn't that use to go by the name of Secret Police!


Why the project EU then, it seems to be making progress despite naysayers. I believe people like yourself are and will be caught swimming against the current. Integration at regional level will gather pace, its only a matter of time. EU is just the first logical step that will show the way.
Back to Top
gcle2003 View Drop Down
WorldHistoria Master
WorldHistoria Master
Avatar
PM Honorary Member

Joined: 06 Dec 2004
Location: Luxembourg
Status: Offline
Points: 13238
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote gcle2003 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 29 Nov 2009 at 23:24
Actually the world needs both integration into higher level groups and also disintegration into smaller units, depending on what aspect of government you are talking about, Primarily the focus on the nation state has to go.
 
As for drgonzaga's comment about Dan Brown, I took it to refer to
Originally posted by eventhorizon eventhorizon wrote:

Lately a friend of mine brought up Bilderbergers as a source of all existing or past troubles of the world, which is kind of a reincarnation of 5000 year old masonic order.

About Bilderbergers, they want one world govt.,
Which is the kind of thing that gives conspiracy theory a bad name.
 
I bet you and your friend never even met a "Bilderberger".
 
Citizen of Ankh-Morpork.

Never believe anything until it has been officially denied - Sir Humphrey Appleby, 1984.

Back to Top
Zagros View Drop Down
WorldHistoria Master
WorldHistoria Master
Avatar
Kaveh ye Ahangar

Joined: 11 Aug 2004
Location: MidX,Engelistan
Status: Offline
Points: 12490
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Zagros Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 29 Nov 2009 at 23:44
Can someone fill me in on the Bilderbergers - I know the conspiracy theories, what might be the facts?
Back to Top
drgonzaga View Drop Down
King
King
Avatar
Plus Ultra

Joined: 02 Oct 2005
Status: Offline
Points: 6262
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote drgonzaga Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 30 Nov 2009 at 02:38
Originally posted by Zagros Zagros wrote:

Can someone fill me in on the Bilderbergers - I know the conspiracy theories, what might be the facts?
 
Read and enjoy:
 
 
And since it is in Wiki, you know it's got to be good!
 
 
It's a variant of the older Trilateral Commission quest for world power as well as the usual claptrap over the World Bank. How about Bill Clinton as the bearer of the "mark"...
Honi soit qui mal y pense
Back to Top
drgonzaga View Drop Down
King
King
Avatar
Plus Ultra

Joined: 02 Oct 2005
Status: Offline
Points: 6262
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote drgonzaga Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 30 Nov 2009 at 02:41
Originally posted by gcle2003 gcle2003 wrote:

Actually the world needs both integration into higher level groups and also disintegration into smaller units, depending on what aspect of government you are talking about, Primarily the focus on the nation state has to go.
 
As for drgonzaga's comment about Dan Brown, I took it to refer to
[QUOTE=eventhorizon]
Lately a friend of mine brought up Bilderbergers as a source of all existing or past troubles of the world, which is kind of a reincarnation of 5000 year old masonic order.
 
Spot on, old chap!
Honi soit qui mal y pense
Back to Top
eventhorizon View Drop Down
Baron
Baron


Joined: 21 Aug 2008
Status: Offline
Points: 432
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote eventhorizon Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 30 Nov 2009 at 02:59

I personally don't believe these or other conspiracy theories, that prey on gullible masses, my preference is for verifiable facts. As I mentioned earlier, I do believe Bilderbergers are sensible well meaning individuals bent on doing good for the public and the people of the world in general, but if they want one world government in a single shot (as they mentioned below), then they are gravely mistaken in choosing such a goal. Personally I believe the world is moving towards that direction, with greater local autonomy for smaller groups (as drgonzaga perhaps and gcle2003 for sure prefers), but it must go through steps, such as regional groups, continent wide Unions etc. before it can be ready for one world govt IMHO.


And no, me or my friend never had a chance to meet one of the big shot Bilderbergers, we are small fries :).


The following is from my favorite wiki:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bilderberg_Group


Because of its secrecy and refusal to issue news releases, the group is frequently accused of secretive and nefarious world plots.[23] Critics include the John Birch Society,[24] the Canadian writer Daniel Estulin, British writer David Icke, American writer Jim Tucker and radio host Alex Jones.

Bilderberg founding member and, for 30 years, a steering committee member, Denis Healey has said:[25]


To say we were striving for a one-world government is exaggerated, but not wholly unfair. Those of us in Bilderberg felt we couldn't go on forever fighting one another for nothing and killing people and rendering millions homeless. So we felt that a single community throughout the world would be a good thing.

According to the American Friends of Bilderberg, the 2008 agenda dealt "mainly with a nuclear free world, cyber terrorism, Africa, Russia, finance, protectionism, US-EU relations, Afghanistan and Pakistan, Islam and Iran".[10]

Origins of conspiracy theories

Jonathan Duffy, writing in BBC News Online Magazine states:


No reporters are invited in and while confidential minutes of meetings are taken, names are not noted... In the void created by such aloofness, an extraordinary conspiracy theory has grown up around the group that alleges the fate of the world is largely decided by Bilderberg.[26]

This secrecy, and lack of reporters in attendance was also noted by Guardian writer Charlie Skelton in his reports on the 2009 conference held in Athens, Greece. Skelton himself was detained by police on three occasions for taking photographs in the vicinity of the conference resort.[27]

According to the investigative journalist Chip Berlet, the origins of Bilderberger conspiracy theories can be traced to activist Phyllis Schlafly. In Berlet's 1994 report Right Woos Left, published by Political Research Associates, he writes:


The views on intractable godless communism expressed by Schwarz were central themes in three other bestselling books which were used to mobilize support for the 1964 Barry Goldwater campaign. The best known was Phyllis Schlafly's A Choice, Not an Echo, which suggested a conspiracy theory in which the Republican Party was secretly controlled by elitist intellectuals dominated by members of the Bilderberger group, whose policies would pave the way for global communist conquest.[28]


Edited by eventhorizon - 30 Nov 2009 at 03:02
Back to Top
eventhorizon View Drop Down
Baron
Baron


Joined: 21 Aug 2008
Status: Offline
Points: 432
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote eventhorizon Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 30 Nov 2009 at 03:29
Originally posted by drgonzaga drgonzaga wrote:

Management of countries was difficult before due to lack of information and method of monitoring, today we have increasingly powerful technology to manage larger more complex systems. That is why I propose that we should leave behind nation states and go for larger and larger units, in phases through trial and error. EU's success as a test case will show the way for all others, but due to difference in regions, every region will have to try and find their own unique path towards integration.

I do believe you need to view an old Sci-fi pic premised on H.G. Wells, Things to Come and then read 1984. In fact in terms of governance and society, the pressures have been in the other direction: to smaller and more cohesive entities. Empires and "world" societies are disintegrating and only the truly foolish blather on about the "global village". Most people do not want to be "managed" and the notion that one size fits all sounds like a nightmare drawn from Soviet consumer production in the 1950s. Social change is always a function of Time and not some cockamamie intellectualization that gives birth to Utopia.
 
"Methods of monitoring" indeed! Didn't that use to go by the name of Secret Police!


drgonzaga Sir, I think you are rightly concerned about personal and individual liberty and freedom in a big monolithic social unit like EU or other regional bloc. I Should comment here though that there seems to be a trade off between amount of individual liberty and pace of development. For rich developed countries, it is a luxury people can afford, even when they go for regional groups like EU, but individual liberty sometimes hinder pace of development in the poorer sections of the world. The communist experience shows that less individual liberty and more control in societies do produce faster human development and helps to pull a large number of poor masses to a better situation much faster than a relatively more open society, an example of which is India, a freer more democratic society, where anti people negative elements can create trouble taking advantage of these freedoms. But after reaching a certain stage, when basic needs like food and education to some level are met, then they stagnate and can no longer compete with older more tried and true evolved systems that are in place in rest of the world. The Chinese are showing a successful transition between two systems, but because of the internal disruption caused by communism, I believe it will take a long time for them to develop a more cohesive and optimized system that can provide world class competitive products like those in Japan, Korea, Germany or even India, all of whom have a more cohesive naturally evolved society.

As for the regional blocs having less individual freedom, I believe that for poorer regions, it is not such a bad thing, if it helps bring up GDP faster, but it is definitely not needed for places like EU or US/Canada union. One of my ideas is that, countries going for regional groupings should have similar per capita GDP's, otherwise they will cause migration which is disruptive. Once a regional group can achieve sufficient GDP growth and per capita GDP becomes similar to neighboring regional bloc, then a union of them can be considered.


Edited by eventhorizon - 30 Nov 2009 at 06:56
Back to Top
eventhorizon View Drop Down
Baron
Baron


Joined: 21 Aug 2008
Status: Offline
Points: 432
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote eventhorizon Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 19 Dec 2009 at 03:51
The Copenhagen summit is a unique event. It seems for the first time humanity is trying hard to  realize and come to the conclusion that they are riding in this small spaceship called earth and they are all in it together. Whatever one does, will affect the other, there is no way one can avoid this reality, so sovereignty for nation states is nothing but a figment of imagination that only fools can afford to have.

Planetary level management of human affairs will become more and more common in the future, I believe this is the first spark that will show the way.

It will not be smooth however, because there are fools in every nation, in fact majority of them, who still don't see the light, that believe that they can live in their self created bubble of living with the addiction of high consumption and thus squander the future of humanity.

Despite all the doom and gloom, the lack of progress in Copenhagen and the lack of final agreement, the noise and the ferocity of arguments being made, gives me some hope, that this time perhaps humanity has woken up to the dangerous path it is treading, perhaps, only perhaps though, whether it is enough to avert sure danger, we cannot be sure. Perhaps it is already too late.

What is to be noted is the obstinacy and in fighting of the world's biggest polluters, EU, China, US, India, Brazil, Russia, Japan and others to control and limit their destructive actions - the large systems among nation states will continue to take full advantage of their competitive edge and expand their respective empires of markets and dependencies among lesser nation states. To counter these destructive forces, what is needed are the regional groups as alternate models of management of human affairs.
Back to Top
drgonzaga View Drop Down
King
King
Avatar
Plus Ultra

Joined: 02 Oct 2005
Status: Offline
Points: 6262
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote drgonzaga Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 19 Dec 2009 at 06:25
The Copenhagen Summit is little more than bad political theatre given a "vacation setting". It is a gathering of the usual suspects taking a break from their regular New York habitat, the UN complex on the East River!
 
In fact, perhaps we are witnessing the last throes of that misbegotten longing for the "earthly paradise" shaped by an organized entity tailoring down to the last detail every aspect of daily life.
Honi soit qui mal y pense
Back to Top
eventhorizon View Drop Down
Baron
Baron


Joined: 21 Aug 2008
Status: Offline
Points: 432
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote eventhorizon Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 19 Dec 2009 at 06:55
Originally posted by drgonzaga drgonzaga wrote:

The Copenhagen Summit is little more than bad political theatre given a "vacation setting". It is a gathering of the usual suspects taking a break from their regular New York habitat, the UN complex on the East River!
 
In fact, perhaps we are witnessing the last throes of that misbegotten longing for the "earthly paradise" shaped by an organized entity tailoring down to the last detail every aspect of daily life.


I share your disdain for the UN and its "comfortable" bureaucrats. UN in my opinion is sorry excuse of a facade, that the powerful countries have put together, so the powerless have some venue to vent their anger, displeasure and frustration, if ever they happen to muster a rare effective mouth piece. It is not a platform to build on best practices of effective planetary management of human affairs.

Power must be balanced with power, so every member of humanity must strive to build their own centers of power, which in my opinion can be done in regional groups.

Having said that, Copenhagen and past and future (more so) conferences like this are unique because for the first time, sovereign nations must care about what is being done by others, so emission reduction by EU, US and Japan is as important as stopping runaway emission from developing nations like China, India or Brazil. This I believe is a first in human history that humanity as a whole is trying to solve a common human problem on a world scale negotiating platform.

As for affecting daily life, I believe we do need to make changes in our ways, growth and consumption with a bulging world population has already hit a brick wall against the natural systems on the planet.

For example, the price of gasoline or coal must include the damage it causes to the environment, the green house gases it produce that adds to global warming and the pollution they produce that directly affect respiratory health of people.

We can no longer ignore this eco-climatic and environmental part of the equation from economics.
Back to Top
drgonzaga View Drop Down
King
King
Avatar
Plus Ultra

Joined: 02 Oct 2005
Status: Offline
Points: 6262
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote drgonzaga Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 20 Dec 2009 at 03:48
Hmm...
 
Power must be balanced with power, so every member of humanity must strive to build their own centers of power, which in my opinion can be done in regional groups.

Just as with the OAS or the AU? Those are just the same cast of characters as found at the UN...by the way, the last time I checked the science, we humans release a significant amount of CO2 ourselves...should there be a tax on these emission!?!

Phrases such as the "natural systems of the planet" are little more than folderol worthy of the annual Dalek Award: Carbon infestation...exterminate! Of course perhaps humanity is not a "natural" factor within the planetary schema and like yeast destined to "drown" in its own juices! 




Edited by drgonzaga - 20 Dec 2009 at 03:49
Honi soit qui mal y pense
Back to Top
eventhorizon View Drop Down
Baron
Baron


Joined: 21 Aug 2008
Status: Offline
Points: 432
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote eventhorizon Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 20 Dec 2009 at 06:45
Originally posted by drgonzaga drgonzaga wrote:

Hmm...
 
Power must be balanced with power, so every member of humanity must strive to build their own centers of power, which in my opinion can be done in regional groups.

Just as with the OAS or the AU? Those are just the same cast of characters as found at the UN...by the way, the last time I checked the science, we humans release a significant amount of CO2 ourselves...should there be a tax on these emission!?!

Phrases such as the "natural systems of the planet" are little more than folderol worthy of the annual Dalek Award: Carbon infestation...exterminate! Of course perhaps humanity is not a "natural" factor within the planetary schema and like yeast destined to "drown" in its own juices! 




The OAS and AU, I believe can be secondary goals. On closer examination I find that for the American continents (North and South) there can be an eventual OAS type union, but the immediate goals should be:

1. UNASUR+Mexico
2. North American Union between the US and Canada

For African Union, although I initially thought this to be a viable primary and immediate goal, I think here also there is some anomaly. I would rather see here:

1. An Arab League succeed among Arabic speaking nations
2. The rest of Africa in a African Union or Sub Saharan African Union led by Nigeria and South Africa

Areas with common or similar history, language, culture and ethnicity that bind people together, are much easier to integrate.

Please note that the above regional groups have close to 0.5 billion or more people in them, which I believe should be a good threshold level for a viable group.

The only exceptions are Central Asian Union which has a smaller population, but cannot join any larger group due to strategic location and the uniqueness of its history. Mongolia may eventually choose to join CAU, if ever it became a viable union and if Russia allows transit between Mongolia and Kazakhstan.

Iran must stay on its own for the time being and not join any neighboring Unions. So should Japan and Korea, all of whom have a quite unique and long history of their own indigenous sizable civilizations, distinct from their neighboring civilizations.

If Turkey cannot get access to EU, then it should consider joining the Arab league, as they do have some common history of living together. It would bring back a much needed balance in the Middle East.

So this gives us the following Unions or states world wide:

1. US+Canada
2. Unasur+Mexico
3. EU
4. Arab League + Turkey (if it cannot gain access to EU)
5. Sub Saharan African Union
6. Russian Federation
7. Central Asian Union + Mongolia
8. China (PRC)
9. ASEAN
10. SAARC
11. Oceania (Australia+New Zealand+PNG)
12. Japan
13. Korea (North + South)
14. Iran (possibly + Afghanistan + Tajikistan, but unlikely)

One of the goals of these kind of Unions, specially for the poorer regions, is to develop "archetypes" from the indigenous ethnic groups, that would be able to lead and govern these areas. Not the cleptomaniac thieving types, but rather modeled after a new eco-conscious, frugal living, creative man that can innovate and transform their respective space and regions. I don't want to quote Nietzche's oberman concept, but some leadership along those lines, I believe, are needed so the rest of the masses can look up to one of their own and be led to meaningful planetary goals.

About carbon tax and human emission of CO2 :), I think its obvious, overpopulation is a problem because we consume, burn and produce huge amounts of CO2 with our energy and other consumption activities, a minuscule portion of it is from human or any other animal lungs due to breathing.

You do however point out another obvious fact that Humanity has become, through its own conscious actions and choice, a malignant cancer on the biosphere (or "yeast drowning in its own juice", if you will), to the detriment of all other species that are sustained by this biosphere on the surface of this planet. If we can successfully engineer our activities back to a sustainable level then we will get our first hands on experience in planetary level management.

Copenhagen is a start, not a great one, hopefully it will lead to better agreements and actions down the line.



Edited by eventhorizon - 20 Dec 2009 at 06:57
Back to Top
drgonzaga View Drop Down
King
King
Avatar
Plus Ultra

Joined: 02 Oct 2005
Status: Offline
Points: 6262
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote drgonzaga Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 20 Dec 2009 at 07:45
The OAS was first the Organization of American States long before Haile Selassie coined his OAS and both are part and parcel of the UN circus; hence eventhorizon (shades of A. C. Clarke), such is really more of the same-old, same-old. And as for an Ubermann elite...please! The problem with the world has come from too much looking up to the dolt of the moment and not enough use of the little gray cells everyone is endowed with at birth! Better to bring back my ancestors and have them carve up the world again--after all they were noted for their noblesse oblige toward the "lesser" folk.
 
Heaven save us from "managers" and efficiency experts!
Honi soit qui mal y pense
Back to Top
eventhorizon View Drop Down
Baron
Baron


Joined: 21 Aug 2008
Status: Offline
Points: 432
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote eventhorizon Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 20 Dec 2009 at 10:08
Originally posted by drgonzaga drgonzaga wrote:

The OAS was first the Organization of American States long before Haile Selassie coined his OAS and both are part and parcel of the UN circus; hence eventhorizon (shades of A. C. Clarke), such is really more of the same-old, same-old. And as for an Ubermann elite...please! The problem with the world has come from too much looking up to the dolt of the moment and not enough use of the little gray cells everyone is endowed with at birth! Better to bring back my ancestors and have them carve up the world again--after all they were noted for their noblesse oblige toward the "lesser" folk.
 
Heaven save us from "managers" and efficiency experts!


As we evolve from primates/great apes to a slightly different state, we carry our legacy tradition of having a leader of the pack, still found among most great apes in the wild. Genetically we are not much removed from that reality, so possibly the need for mythology, religion, hero worship etc. I am all for a direct democracy, but it is better to have one small step at a time, there is no magic carpet, we must make small measured steps from where we are to where we want to go. I am definitely not talking of a hereditary nobility, those days are past us, but more of a meritocracy. The right balance of governance is to be found from trial and error. The higher the GDP and Human Development Index of a region, the less is the need for leadership and the balance tilts more towards collective decision making.

One of the fundamental task of these large systems, specially poorer mismanaged ones, is to create such indigenous elites as will propel these regions forward, a symbiotic relationship between the two, the thought and idea leaders and the led. Much of this relationship and fabric was lost in the last 500 years. Its time to recreate them and create new ones for future. Unless this is done in some forms or fashion, the problems of poverty and mismanagement will never be solved with band aid from outside. Poverty is a symptom of non-competitive disrupted system, the solution is competitive large systems (read regional groups), self sufficient with indigenous leadership.

There is much potential in the creativity of human brains, till a creative AI is invented, but we need better planetary management, which starts, I believe, with integration of regional groups.

Arthur C. Clarke was a scientist and science fiction writer, my ideas are more about evolution and future direction of human societies, but I have not read any of his works, so I don't know what he talks about.


Edited by eventhorizon - 20 Dec 2009 at 10:09
Back to Top
pinguin View Drop Down
WorldHistoria Master
WorldHistoria Master
Avatar

Joined: 29 Sep 2006
Status: Offline
Points: 15238
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote pinguin Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 20 Dec 2009 at 11:52
Originally posted by eventhorizon eventhorizon wrote:

Filmed in the slums of Africa and the barrios of Latin America, The End of Poverty? features expert insights from: Nobel prize winners in Economics, Amartya Sen and Joseph Stiglitz; acclaimed authors Susan George, Eric Toussaint, John Perkins, Chalmers Johnson; university professors William Easterly and Michael Watts; government ministers such as Bolivia's Vice President Alvaro Garcia Linera and the leaders of social movements in Brazil, Venezuela, Kenya and Tanzania . It is produced by Cinema Libre Studio in collaboration with the Robert Schalkenbach Foundation.

There is something ridiculous when a study, any given study, put at the same level the problems of Africa with the ones of Latin America. And there is an even worst analysis when those same studies put Bolivia (our poorest country) as the example of South America Confused...
 
Communists worldwide, please listen. The Allende experiment failed simply because communism don't work well in societies that are really developing. Communism is only for the basket cases that don't have any opportunity to go. Communism failed in Latin America, and will fail everywhere.
 
 
Originally posted by eventhorizon eventhorizon wrote:

Can we really end poverty within our current economic system? Think again.
 
Of course it is possible. The only way out of poverty is by working. Continents on welfare won't achieve anything.
 
If you want money, work for it.
Back to Top
pinguin View Drop Down
WorldHistoria Master
WorldHistoria Master
Avatar

Joined: 29 Sep 2006
Status: Offline
Points: 15238
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote pinguin Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 20 Dec 2009 at 11:58
Originally posted by eventhorizon eventhorizon wrote:

...
The OAS and AU, I believe can be secondary goals. On closer examination I find that for the American continents (North and South) there can be an eventual OAS type union, but the immediate goals should be:

1. UNASUR+Mexico
2. North American Union between the US and Canada

For African Union, although I initially thought this to be a viable primary and immediate goal, I think here also there is some anomaly. I would rather see here:

1. An Arab League succeed among Arabic speaking nations
2. The rest of Africa in a African Union or Sub Saharan African Union led by Nigeria and South Africa

Areas with common or similar history, language, culture and ethnicity that bind people together, are much easier to integrate.
 
Once again, comparing Africa with Latin America is nonsense. While Brazil send rockets to space, and develops its own technology, Africa doesn't even has roads. With respect to unions, who needs them? The most sucessfull countries have gone to the global market directly.
 
Countries that work, develop. That's so simple. Who needs international organizations of parasytes and politicians?
 
Back to Top
eventhorizon View Drop Down
Baron
Baron


Joined: 21 Aug 2008
Status: Offline
Points: 432
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote eventhorizon Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 20 Dec 2009 at 12:25
Originally posted by pinguin pinguin wrote:

Originally posted by eventhorizon eventhorizon wrote:

...
The OAS and AU, I believe can be secondary goals. On closer examination I find that for the American continents (North and South) there can be an eventual OAS type union, but the immediate goals should be:

1. UNASUR+Mexico
2. North American Union between the US and Canada

For African Union, although I initially thought this to be a viable primary and immediate goal, I think here also there is some anomaly. I would rather see here:

1. An Arab League succeed among Arabic speaking nations
2. The rest of Africa in a African Union or Sub Saharan African Union led by Nigeria and South Africa

Areas with common or similar history, language, culture and ethnicity that bind people together, are much easier to integrate.
 
Once again, comparing Africa with Latin America is nonsense. While Brazil send rockets to space, and develops its own technology, Africa doesn't even has roads. With respect to unions, who needs them? The most sucessfull countries have gone to the global market directly.
 
Countries that work, develop. That's so simple. Who needs international organizations of parasytes and politicians?
 


I guess EU was created just for fun :).

What is wrong with Africa, definitely their GDP and HDI is not same as that of Latin America, no one is claiming that they are, but the justifications for having regional groups are the same.

I mentioned those two regions because drgonzaga brought them up. In another post, I do talk about all regions of the world, not just Africa and Latin America.

1. US+Canada
2. Unasur+Mexico
3. EU
4. Arab League + Turkey (if it cannot gain access to EU)
5. Sub Saharan African Union
6. Russian Federation
7. Central Asian Union + Mongolia
8. China (PRC)
9. ASEAN
10. SAARC
11. Oceania (Australia+New Zealand+PNG)
12. Japan
13. Korea (North + South)
14. Iran (possibly + Afghanistan + Tajikistan, but unlikely)

I am not promoting communism, what I am promoting is "Regional integration":

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regional_integration




Edited by eventhorizon - 20 Dec 2009 at 12:51
Back to Top
pinguin View Drop Down
WorldHistoria Master
WorldHistoria Master
Avatar

Joined: 29 Sep 2006
Status: Offline
Points: 15238
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote pinguin Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 20 Dec 2009 at 13:03
Nope. The EU was created to stop the relavite decline of the individual countries with respect to the competition from the U.S. and Asia. It works because those countries are developed already.
For developing countries, however, economical alliances are just a waste of time. Those countries should work to develop first.
 
Take for instance my country, Chile, which is almost developed already. Our strategy is simply to commerce with everybody, establish free-trade agreements with everybody, but don't compromise with economical protectionist alliances at all. If we want to spread our influence we invest in the targeted countries. If we want to compite better, we make complementary alliances.
 
If Chile had signed the Mercosur agreement, I bet we would be a lot worst than right now. Why we do need Mercosur when our import taxes are today smaller than Mercosur's.  Perhaps in the future, when Brazil, Argentina and Uruguay reach development, they will also change theirs mind on protectionism, and time will come to make some kind of alliances in the EU style.
 
However, countries should forget about alliances as the reason for development. They aren't. The only way a country can develop is working hard and being agresive in the international markets.
The rethoric of international congress won't replace economical failure.
 
By the way, our country belong to the ASEAN, it is guess member of Mercosur, it has free trade agreements with the U.S., Canada, Korea, Japan, China among many other countries. We armies of Chile and Argentina collaborate today. We share plans with the countries of the region in the physical integration through highways and railroads. Besides, most of our foreign investment is put in our neighbour countries. Even more, the president of the OAS is Chilean, and Chile is collaborating to rebuild Haiti.
 
So, the fact we don't believe in monolythic organism shouldn't be confussed with an isolationist policy at all.
 
 
 
 


Edited by pinguin - 20 Dec 2009 at 13:18
Back to Top
gcle2003 View Drop Down
WorldHistoria Master
WorldHistoria Master
Avatar
PM Honorary Member

Joined: 06 Dec 2004
Location: Luxembourg
Status: Offline
Points: 13238
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote gcle2003 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 20 Dec 2009 at 21:19
pinguin, what you seem to be arguing about is not the establishment of such regional (or other - cf the Commonwealth) associations, but what internal and external policies they should pursue. Which is reasonable enough but kind of misses the point.
Citizen of Ankh-Morpork.

Never believe anything until it has been officially denied - Sir Humphrey Appleby, 1984.

Back to Top
drgonzaga View Drop Down
King
King
Avatar
Plus Ultra

Joined: 02 Oct 2005
Status: Offline
Points: 6262
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote drgonzaga Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 21 Dec 2009 at 02:03
Regional Integration?
 
Isn't that the same as shaping a larger private club to replace an older one, while still adhering to the old "blackball" principle?
 
Certainly, eventhorizon, in your regional fiddlings the groupings are rather arbitrary and in many instances little more than economic nonsense given contemporary socio-political realities. In fact, is there not a rather strong streak of personal prejudice as when you add that +Mexico to the UNASUR phantasm--
 
 
--which after all defies all sound market realities? We will not say much about the "isolation" of certain entities (Japan, Korea, "Oceania"...), nor the absurdity of the "Arab League"! 
 
 


Edited by drgonzaga - 21 Dec 2009 at 02:47
Honi soit qui mal y pense
Back to Top
pinguin View Drop Down
WorldHistoria Master
WorldHistoria Master
Avatar

Joined: 29 Sep 2006
Status: Offline
Points: 15238
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote pinguin Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 21 Dec 2009 at 02:22
Originally posted by gcle2003 gcle2003 wrote:

pinguin, what you seem to be arguing about is not the establishment of such regional (or other - cf the Commonwealth) associations, but what internal and external policies they should pursue. Which is reasonable enough but kind of misses the point.
 
Well, my point is that if a country wants to develop, it is better to go straight to the global market, rather to wait for partners to help. Partners usually don't help much at least if they have something in return. In short, my point is to embrace economical common sense, rather than dreams of regional power.
Back to Top
pinguin View Drop Down
WorldHistoria Master
WorldHistoria Master
Avatar

Joined: 29 Sep 2006
Status: Offline
Points: 15238
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote pinguin Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 21 Dec 2009 at 02:23
Originally posted by drgonzaga drgonzaga wrote:

Regional Integration?
 
Isn't that the same as shaping a larger private club to replace an older one, while still adhering to the old "blackball" principle?
 
Certainly, eventhorizon, in your regional fiddlings the groupings are rather arbitray and in many instances little more than economic nonsense given contemporary socio-political realities. In fact, is there not a rather string streak of personal prejudice as when you add that +Mexico to the UNASUR phantasm--
 
 
--which after all defies all sound market realities? We will not say much about the "isolation" of certain entities (Japan, Korea, "Oceania"...), nor the absurdity of the "Arab League"! 
 
 
 
Agreed. For Mexico it makes more sense to belong to NAFTA and the ASEAN, because its main trading partners are in those regions, rathern than in Central America or the Caribbean.
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  123 8>
  Share Topic   

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Forum Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 12.01
Copyright ©2001-2018 Web Wiz Ltd.

This page was generated in 0.172 seconds.