Jump to content
Objectivism Online Forum

Until today Libya was on UN Human Rights Council.

Rate this topic


CapitalistSwine
 Share

Recommended Posts

So... what has United Nations done to sanction human rights again?

Write very strong-worded letters to dictators telling them to play nice. As you can see, apparently some of these letters were signed by dictators as well.

Edited by CapitalistSwine
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Amazing that the only comments on this forum about the ongoing Arab Revolutions are cliche conservative talking points about the UN. Not that they're inaccurate, but can't you people come up with something more substantive to say about a popular movement that could wind up modernizing large swaths of the Muslim world? This is why I rarely post here anymore.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Amazing that the only comments on this forum about the ongoing Arab Revolutions are cliche conservative talking points about the UN. Not that they're inaccurate, but can't you people come up with something more substantive to say about a popular movement that could wind up modernizing large swaths of the Muslim world? This is why I rarely post here anymore.

My focus on posting this was not even really related to what has been going on in that region but rather simply about the U.N. This recent event has made a perfect point in that respect. It would help if there was a better thread concerning the actual regional revolution. So far I haven't seen one other than that one that kind of diverted from the main discussion so I haven't really put much input here on the forums.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That wasn't a swipe at any particular poster. Just amazement at the apparent failure of this forum, as a whole, to even have a serious, ongoing conversation about these events. I mean, I certainly haven't done a better job at starting a thread than anyone else, but I don't post here that much anymore. Just seems like at least one of the regulars would have picked this up and run with it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That wasn't a swipe at any particular poster. Just amazement at the apparent failure of this forum, as a whole, to even have a serious, ongoing conversation about these events. I mean, I certainly haven't done a better job at starting a thread than anyone else, but I don't post here that much anymore. Just seems like at least one of the regulars would have picked this up and run with it.

There are other threads on this subject. The reason we don't post in them every day is that there's very little to be excited about. Those crowds are far from rational, or in favor of Capitalism (mainly because they have no idea what it is).

By the way, you also had something to say about this, in your previous post. You said that "it's a popular movement that could wind up modernizing large swaths of the Muslim world". While attacking the comments in this thread, you were fair enough to admit they are accurate. Allow me to be fair with your take on the subject, and start with something you did right: you didn't commit to actually making a definitive statement about it, you used the word "might". I assume what followed after that 'might' is a projection of your ideology (unless you're just reciting the projection of CNN's ideology). It certainly doesn't reflect any facts I'm aware of.

If by "modernize" you are referring to the calls for "social justice", more welfare (that's certainly what Liberals like to call "modern"), or democracy (mainly for the purpose of imposing Islamic morality and politics on the secular minority, through government force), then sure, that's what these people are fighting for. But if you mean freedom on principle, especially economic freedom, or secularism (these are the two things that I would at least like to think still define modern western societies), I have seen no mention of either of them among the protesters' demands.

Like I said in one of those secret threads on this, the overthrowing of some of these dictatorships and the subsequent freedom/chaos might allow for a brief window, at least in Egypt (before the Islamists take over through democracy) to introduce those ideas into the debate, and hope enough people embrace them. But as of today, there is no movement to modernize the Muslim world, in the sense I would use the word modern.

Edited by Tanaka
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The UN is just a den of thieves.

Yup. And get ready for their power grab, under the guise of "globalization". They want to establish the same pecking order as in the "developed" nations, but on a global scale. That makes the pots bigger and the skimming easier to get away with.

Sheesh.

- ico

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That wasn't a swipe at any particular poster. Just amazement at the apparent failure of this forum, as a whole, to even have a serious, ongoing conversation about these events. I mean, I certainly haven't done a better job at starting a thread than anyone else, but I don't post here that much anymore. Just seems like at least one of the regulars would have picked this up and run with it.

Somebody got up on the wrong side of bed ...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yup. And get ready for their power grab, under the guise of "globalization". They want to establish the same pecking order as in the "developed" nations, but on a global scale. That makes the pots bigger and the skimming easier to get away with.

Sheesh.

- ico

But these are just conservative talking points. :rolleyes: Did you get your DNC Talking Points Bulletin today? :P

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Amazing that the only comments on this forum about the ongoing Arab Revolutions are cliche conservative talking points about the UN. Not that they're inaccurate, but can't you people come up with something more substantive to say about a popular movement that could wind up modernizing large swaths of the Muslim world? This is why I rarely post here anymore.

I'm so sorry. We just aren't your intellectual equals. We be skeered.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That wasn't a swipe at any particular poster. Just amazement at the apparent failure of this forum, as a whole, to even have a serious, ongoing conversation about these events. I mean, I certainly haven't done a better job at starting a thread than anyone else, but I don't post here that much anymore. Just seems like at least one of the regulars would have picked this up and run with it.

It seems like the revolts are happening because the dictators in question aren't muslim -enough-

Edited by Black Wolf
Link to comment
Share on other sites

can't you people come up with something more substantive to say about a popular movement that could wind up modernizing large swaths of the Muslim world?

In the 1920's and 30's the spread of fascism and communism preceded the Second World War. What we are seeing now is the spread of a militant and aggressive Islam that will precede the next world wide war that will occur in the 2010's or 2020's. Economic conditions provoked the current round of revolutions and thus provided the seeming synchronicity not any kind of secret conspiracy, but that is how the Great Depression played into the spread of fascism also. The current Saudi and Iranian religious propaganda nicely parallels the work of the international Communist party of the previous era.

It is not a positive development and we can't do anything about it so there is no point in talking about than to brood over bad news.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Au contraire, mon frere Grimes: it MAY BE a positive development, long term, if it wakes the honest folk out of their slumber. The world wars were awful, but as they were unavoidable, they did provide an excuse to blow up the fascists -- and to this day, European politicians are wary about being labeled fascist, which is a good thing.

People in a fog will wake up when they see some sharp light source, even if the only light sharp enough comes from the headlights of a mac truck bearing down on them at high speed. It may be too late for them so save themselves, and that would be terrible, but they will wake up.

The problem I do have with predictions of military doom are that, if it's so predictable, then why don't we just nuke 'em now, while they are still "babies" economically, before they can catch up militarily? That is the natural consequence of assuming that war is inevitable; if it is unavoidable, then put down "Leaves of Grass" and pick up "The Art of War", where Lao Tzu makes clear that one should choose the time and place for battles to one's greatest advantage.

- ico

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Good lord, are we watching the same newscasts? The Islamist movement has been, at best, on the sidelines of the revolts in Tunisia, Egypt, and Libya. The overwhelming preponderance of statements from the protesters has been about toppling dictatorships and installing government that answers to its people--not the Quran.

And I love the dismissal of any potential progress, because of the fact that the protesters haven't been calling for a laissez-faire capitalist economy. You're setting up a very dangerous false dichotomy, where a country is either Singapore or North Korea, with no intermediates. Toppling dictators and installing accountable government is a step in the right direction.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The world wars were awful, but as they were unavoidable,

. . .

The problem I do have with predictions of military doom are that, if it's so predictable, then why don't we just nuke 'em now, while they are still "babies" economically, before they can catch up militarily?

Answer your own question about the past, then see if there are analog reasons operating in the present.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Good lord, are we watching the same newscasts? The Islamist movement has been, at best, on the sidelines of the revolts in Tunisia, Egypt, and Libya. The overwhelming preponderance of statements from the protesters has been about toppling dictatorships and installing government that answers to its people--not the Quran.

If the population of "statements from the protesters" you know of is drawn from watching TV, you are drawing the conclusion you are being manipulated to draw.

You're setting up a very dangerous false dichotomy, where a country is either Singapore or North Korea, with no intermediates.

Not at all. The initial status was intermediate. If there is movement and not just a change of faces then it indeed will be better or worse.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Good lord, are we watching the same newscasts?

Probably not, judging from your description of what the protesters are "saying". You're hearing the voices whatever you're watching selected for you to hear. If you want reality, you should probably look for more diverse sources. Try some of the Israeli media, they're less likely to only tell you what you want to hear.

And I love the dismissal of any potential progress, because of the fact that the protesters haven't been calling for a laissez-faire capitalist economy.

I'd love to see you quote someone in this thread who made that argument.

The actual point being made is that most of those protesters are fighting for less of a capitalist economy than what they have today, and less of a secular government than the ones they have today. That's what's being pointed out to you, not that they're not Objectivists.

You're setting up a very dangerous false dichotomy, where a country is either Singapore or North Korea

Let's take Bahrain for instance. Do you think a revolution will bring it closer to Singapore, or further?

Edited by Tanaka
Link to comment
Share on other sites

True, the Israeli media isn't going to tell me what I want to hear. But do you seriously think that the Israeli media in this instance is going to be objective? The Israelis have a much deeper interest in these events than any western country, and it is in their interests to paint the movement as Islamist, in order to prompt the major players to forestall any Islamist movements.

Even so, I opened the Jerusalem Times just now and the following 2 articles were the first ones to jump out at me, as being about the uprisings:

http://blogs.jpost.com/content/revolution-apparently-order-day

http://blogs.jpost.com/content/how-egypt-more-libya-will-affect-middle-east

Though they both mention the Muslim Brotherhood's posturing, neither paints this as a movement that is primarily Islamist in nature, and the first one even seems cautiously optimistic about the ultimate effect on the region. I've never claimed anywhere that this is going to result in full democratization or modernization. I'll wait for history to decide. But I do think there is reason to hope that the Middle East is taking an important step in the direction of modernization. And while people in here are decrying my statement that the uprising is not primarily Islamist, no one is offering me any evidence that it is--or that it is, as you just said, "less secular and capitalistic".

And I haven't followed Bahrain that closely. I know the Sunnis are protesting against Shi'a rule, so there may be more of a religious tint to that one. But the 3 major revolutions (Tunisia, Egypt, Libya) do not, so far, seem to have taken on an Islamist fervor.

Edited by The Wrath
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...