LongTimeLurker Posted February 18, 2014 Share Posted February 18, 2014 Maybe what he's getting at is the way supposedly democratic revolutions in the Middle East have wound up bringing in Islamic theocracies? There is also the argument that while our style of democracy won out over the Soviet model of socialism by being more efficient in economic terms, the Chinese now have a non-democratic style of government that may be getting the job done better on the economic side of things. if so, where does that lead down the road? People like Slavoj Zizek question Francis Fukuyama's "end of history" argument on that basis. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dee Man Posted February 18, 2014 Share Posted February 18, 2014 Maybe what he's getting at is the way supposedly democratic revolutions in the Middle East have wound up bringing in Islamic theocracies? There is also the argument that while our style of democracy won out over the Soviet model of socialism by being more efficient in economic terms, the Chinese now have a non-democratic style of government that may be getting the job done better on the economic side of things. if so, where does that lead down the road? People like Slavoj Zizek question Francis Fukuyama's "end of history" argument on that basis. I'm sure the people on the receiving end of human rights abuses in China can take great comfort in the fact that their economy is booming. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LongTimeLurker Posted February 18, 2014 Share Posted February 18, 2014 The argument of Slavoj Zizek tends to be that western style of capitalism will fail eventually (as it came close to doing in 2007) for a wide range of reasons, but he is unsure as to what will replace it. He certainly isn't arguing for the Chinese model to be applied universally. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HTG Posted February 18, 2014 Share Posted February 18, 2014 The argument of Slavoj Zizek tends to be that western style of capitalism will fail eventually (as it came close to doing in 2007) for a wide range of reasons, but he is unsure as to what will replace it. He certainly isn't arguing for the Chinese model to be applied universally. Far less the North Korean model. Failed past interventions are not a reason to never intervene in future. There was intervention in Kosovo which probably prevented a huge amount of unnecessary suffering. North Korea quite obviously needs an intervention. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Broken Algorithms Posted February 18, 2014 Share Posted February 18, 2014 You really can't compare North Korea to Iraq. In the event of a war, North Korea has a massive ground force in itself who have been drilled to fight to the last. Were the event to actually occur, you'd have a massive lose of life in the first place. Should the North Korean regime crumble, then you'd have to ask what would replace it. China would hardly be thrilled at seeing a unified democratic Korean peninsula, and while it wouldn't likely cause World War 3 it would raise questions of the next step. It'd probably be just as realistic for the Chinese to phase Kim Jong-un out and have their own handpicked leader who would gradually change them over time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LongTimeLurker Posted February 18, 2014 Share Posted February 18, 2014 Suspect that last bit may be why the uncle got executed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fotbawmad Posted February 18, 2014 Share Posted February 18, 2014 Some people don't seem to understand not everyone around the world wants it needs our style of democracy We don't live in a democracy; we live in a plutocracy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tom McB Posted February 18, 2014 Share Posted February 18, 2014 We don't live in a democracy; we live in a plutocracy. Whilst that might be a good debating point for 6th year wannabe politicos it does raise a laugh otherwise. Thank you and goodnight. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tom McB Posted February 18, 2014 Share Posted February 18, 2014 Some people don't seem to understand not everyone around the world wants it needs our style of democracy Which bit is your point, wants or needs? The sentence is incoherent. Absolutely How can you agree with an incoherent post? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Granny Danger Posted February 18, 2014 Share Posted February 18, 2014 Some people don't seem to understand not everyone around the world wants it needs our style of democracy Mmm, this is where I find myself in a quandary. However much I think there are problems with our style of representative democracy, particularly in relation to our apparent ineffectiveness in the face of global capitalism, I still think we have a better system of government than any of the known alternatives. Many folk in other parts of the world would have little opportunity to learn about our democratic structures and would have no chance of adopting them even if they did. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sergeant Wilson Posted February 18, 2014 Share Posted February 18, 2014 We don't live in a democracy; we live in a plutocracy.Ideal, suits me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yoda Posted February 18, 2014 Share Posted February 18, 2014 Bollox. Here's your starters for 10: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Senkaku_Islands_dispute http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2012_China_anti-Japanese_demonstrations It's not particularly fair to pin all the blame on China over the Senkaku Islands but regardless, it's not an issue that is going to kick off into out and out military confrontation between Japan and China. It's a posturing exercise by both sides. You really can't compare North Korea to Iraq. In the event of a war, North Korea has a massive ground force in itself who have been drilled to fight to the last. Were the event to actually occur, you'd have a massive lose of life in the first place. Should the North Korean regime crumble, then you'd have to ask what would replace it. China would hardly be thrilled at seeing a unified democratic Korean peninsula, and while it wouldn't likely cause World War 3 it would raise questions of the next step. It'd probably be just as realistic for the Chinese to phase Kim Jong-un out and have their own handpicked leader who would gradually change them over time. If the U.S. got involved, the North Korean military would be destroyed. They still have tanks in operation that outdate the Iraqi tanks used in the first Gulf War. Fanatical they might be but they don't have the technology to match the U.S. and they don't have any action experience. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
welshbairn Posted February 18, 2014 Share Posted February 18, 2014 Mmm, this is where I find myself in a quandary. However much I think there are problems with our style of representative democracy, particularly in relation to our apparent ineffectiveness in the face of global capitalism, I still think we have a better system of government than any of the known alternatives. Many folk in other parts of the world would have little opportunity to learn about our democratic structures and would have no chance of adopting them even if they did. We're lucky in that we're divided by income rather than by religion/tribe/clan first, and income second. The closest thing to democracy in the middle east, for example, happens in Lebanon. If you want a government job your MP has to put your name up (in practice). He'll only do it if he thinks you'll vote for him, which he'll only believe if you're in the same clan/religion as him. If you want a school renovated you need an MP of the same clan/religion as the school area. Democracy becomes demographics. That's the same in most of the world. Meanwhile the rich get richer and the poor get poorer. Much like here I suppose.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vikingTON Posted February 18, 2014 Share Posted February 18, 2014 North Korea have trillions of pounds worth of untapped resources. Such as? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Bairn Posted February 18, 2014 Share Posted February 18, 2014 Suspect that last bit may be why the uncle got executed. In cahoots with China? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
welshbairn Posted February 18, 2014 Share Posted February 18, 2014 North Korea have trillions of pounds worth of untapped resources. Such as? Cheap labour? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fotbawmad Posted February 18, 2014 Share Posted February 18, 2014 Mmm, this is where I find myself in a quandary. However much I think there are problems with our style of representative democracy, particularly in relation to our apparent ineffectiveness in the face of global capitalism, I still think we have a better system of government than any of the known alternatives. Many folk in other parts of the world would have little opportunity to learn about our democratic structures and would have no chance of adopting them even if they did. There is two extremes of governance. One being the New World Order, which is maximum centralized control, and the other being anarchism which is self governance with no hierarchy. Currently there is a misconception, even by those who understand the system well. That capitalism is the cause of all our problems today. When in fact we live in a crony capitalist system. Real business people make their money in the open markets, and are entitled to their vast fortune. They do this by providing goods and services that people want, by working out correctly what assets will be in most demand or by investing capital in successful projects. All these activities boost economic growth, increase employment, help develop poor economies and lift living standards. However, crony capitalists rely on the government being in bed with them. They can get the government to rig markets for them. This can be done by putting up barriers, which restrict competition. Provide a company with grants, special tax breaks and acting as guarantor i.e. bailouts. As well as using their political connections to obtain lucrative contracts and other special privileges, None of these add any economic value. They merely redistribute wealth. So when the next recession comes along. People shouldn't be occupying The City or Wall Street. Instead they should be occupying Westminster and Washington. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hillonearth Posted February 18, 2014 Share Posted February 18, 2014 Such as? http://www.themontrealreview.com/2009/Rare-Earth-Metals-North-Korea-New-Trump-Card.php They might not be the easiest to extract given the terrain in the North, but they're sitting on an estimated $6tn worth of minerals according to the article above. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CowdenbeathLoyal Posted February 19, 2014 Share Posted February 19, 2014 http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2014/feb/17/un-warns-north-koreas-kim-jong-un-strongly-worded-/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Enigma Posted February 19, 2014 Share Posted February 19, 2014 It's not particularly fair to pin all the blame on China over the Senkaku Islands but regardless, it's not an issue that is going to kick off into out and out military confrontation between Japan and China. It's a posturing exercise by both sides. I'm not blaming them solely. They are, however, hardly backing down or doing anything to ease tensions, far from it they're fanning the flames. Yeah, we're not going to see full scale military confrontation but it is likely to escalate diplomatically. I'm also not exactly convinced by China's claim, and at any rate the ROC's is more legitimate than the PRC's. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.