Xander-- More War for Democracy?

Bill’s inspired piece has actually inspired me to quickly devise a companion post. He suggests that the US should be engaging in neo-colonialism to secure more resources. I think the US needs to look beyond simple procurement and needs to engage in substantial nation building to form an international environment in which conflict becomes obsolete. In order to do this however, a lot of conflict is required. You can’t make an omelet without breaking some eggs.

During the Cold War the US promoted democratization in Latin America and in various places in Asia. This was done to counter our ideological counter, the USSR; but it led to some very positive gains for the international system in general. Fast-forward to the current date, and many of these democracies are starting to falter or never fully took shape to begin with. More institutional nation building is required, and in more places than just Latin America and Asia, Africa and the Middle East should be paramount on our list. Our current effort in Iraq is hard going and may dissuade further democracy building but we shouldn’t let it deter us; we are on the right course.

Much of the nation building can be done through non-military means. Many nations want to develop their governmental structure to be more representative but lack the resources and/or knowledge. Through institutions such as the IMF and the World Bank democracy can be further promoted. These institutions need to do more to instill democratic practices abroad.

For those nations that avoid democratization, the US offers a great alternative: liberation of the people at the hands of the American military. Dictators want to oppress the population and deny self-rule? Overthrow them through American democracy building forces. The creation of a special arm of the military dedicated to nation building and intent on installing democracies would do much to bring about world peace and to secure American ideals as global ideals.

“God willing, we will have MORE war for [democracy] and less liberal treason.”
Sorry Bill, had to paraphrase you.

Bill-- More War For Resources?

Debt forgiveness, foreign aid, assisting counties obtain independence from colonial bonds, the so called “liberal agenda”. These are all seen as some of the more beneficial activities that the US has engaged in over the last century. The current war in Iraq is seen as one of the least. It is amazing how the liberals within the US have turned reality on its head.

The international community is clamoring for better terms of trade, fairer distribution of resources, autonomy from US influence, etc. Of course they are, it means more resources for them and less for the most powerful nation in the system. The question is, why are the agendas of rival nations being given anything more than mere lip service when the real obligation of the government, procuring more resources and securing future access for our nation while denying rival nations access, is going unachieved?

Recently the US engaged in the first sane act of international activity in quite a while, it launched a war for resources. The political weakness of the liberal agenda at home has turned that success into a complete failure. What should have ended as US occupation over a new colonial territory rich in oil has become an exercise in madness. We are granting autonomy to a nation full of people that want our destruction and have a massive amount of resources to make that dream a reality? Only in the liberal political field does this logic make sense.

So what is the right course of action for the US? Increase the force with which we are occupying Iraq and make no attempt at granting independence. Install a colonial government that is responsive to US needs and that ensures continued access to resources. Then, move on to the next resource rich nation that is hostile towards our agenda and establish colonial foot holdings there as well. By each step we increase our own resource holdings and deny them to our rivals. It is the exact same agenda the liberals are pushing except in reverse, we make ourselves more prosperous and more secure, instead of our rivals and enemies.

God willing, we will have MORE war for resources and less liberal treason.

I'm Bill Megatron, and this makes sense.

Fitz--The Illusion of Political Participation

I just voted. I voted early, by mail, in the state of Arizona. I want change in Washington. I feel as though my political leaders are leading the country in the wrong direction, are compromising our civil liberties, compromising the principles of democracy, are by and large corrupt, and they fail to truly represent me.

However, having performed my civic duty, I can not help but feel that it will not matter much.

War will continue. The Military Commission Act of 2006 will stay on the books.

In many ways I am frustrated with the political process and with my leaders, but there seems little I can do about it. I can vote, which I have, but in the end it seems that it may have little impact. I still feel unsatisfied.

Supposedly I live in a democracy. The theory being that I have full access to the political process and that my participation not only matters, but is required for the successful running of government for and by the people.

However, who am I voting for? Many comment that often we vote for the lesser of two evils. Often, candidates take extreme positions that I want nothing to do with. More than that, given the political ads shown over the last several weeks, many do not seem to have any substantive to offer me other than to smear their opponent or offer some catchy slogan. Many make false claims about the other. www.factcheck.org

We are largely removed from the political process. We are only able to voice our opinion every two years or so for representatives of the house, every six for senators, and every four for the executive. We realistically have only two choices when voting, either democrat or republican. Both of which, due to the current trend of polarization, represent the more extreme ends of the political spectrum. Having only two realistic choices further restricts my freedom of action. Choice is vital to any democracy and choosing between two inadequate alternatives is almost no choice at all.

The executive also seems to be more extreme than your typical republican. This coupled with a more extreme representation in congressman, removes me farther from the political process. My viewpoint, which is not represented by the party that is on my side of the political spectrum, is demonized or marginalized by those in power and those in the electorate that still support them, which according to the polls is thankfully much smaller.

But that in itself highlights something. The percentage of people who think we are heading in the right direction is down to 25%. The percentage of people who think our representatives are doing a good job is down to the low twenties. Approval of the executive is around 35%. Only 25% of the people believe that we are making progress in Iraq. http://www.pollingreport.com/index.html

Yet, the current administration still holds to the philosophy of “stay the course.” Recently, Bush said they will not reconsider their position in Iraq. This does not seem very responsive to public opinion. It seems the public will does not matter to our leaders.

So, I face a situation where the party on the left side of the political spectrum does not seem to be advancing my interests and the party in power has gone too far with its own position. Further, they completely ignore the electorate.

What recourse does the electorate have?

One could become a full-time activist. However, sustained activism is time-consuming and often offers little pay. It requires extreme dedication. One activist job I considered required at least 70 hours a week during peak election times and the pay was meager. It would require a significant life-style change and much sacrifice to work for change and change would probably still be small.

One could participate more fully in the political process; enter politics at the national level. However, campaigning requires money. Many who run for congress come from the upper-middle class with substantially higher incomes than your average American citizen. Many are independently wealthy and your average campaign can cost a $100,000 or more. The Senate has often been referred to as a “millionaires’ club.

It certainly does have the features of an elite system. Often the same family names crop up and it is easy to think that there is a certain aristocracy to the political process. Discussing this at some length with deezelboy, it does seem to be the perfect form of government control. Give the people substantial freedoms and the illusion that they have some influence, but make sure that larger or more substantive contribution is extremely difficult for your average citizen. Government is free to choose what policies it thinks are best and can largely ignore the electorate, even in the face of overwhelming disapproval.

So the question remains…is this how it should be? Certainly the founders of this nation were often elitist in their attitudes and had an interest in creating a system that ensured that the elite maintained their position against the impassioned or unruly mob. Many had an inherent distrust of democracy as a form of government, thinking that the republican rule by the best of society was preferable.

Then again, Ben Franklin in particular was a champion of the average citizen and wanted more voter participation in the new republic and overtime, the U.S. has become more democratic.

Is the current frustration due to a general laziness by my fellow citizens? With many resources offered through the web to gather information on issues and candidates, is it just pure laziness by the electorate to become better informed and to elect better leaders?

Or are the fears of the elite true? Are the masses too dumb to govern? Is our education system starting to exhibit signs of its deterioration and failure as more and more seem to have less of an understanding of their own history and political process?

If indeed, a representative democracy depends on an intelligent, responsible, and informed electorate to hold its leaders accountable to the collective will; then what can we be doing more of to make sure this happens?

Stuart -- Last Night On Earth

Lately, I have been having this recurring dream where I know that I am living my last day of existence. It never seems like I am upset at this fact, or that anyone else is in danger, or that I myself am in any danger and yet, I know, unequivocally that when the sun comes up again I wont be there to see it. Upon first glance this dream seems disturbing, if for no other reason at all, it doesn’t disturb me. However, it does present an interesting series of questions that I want to put to all of you.

First, if this were your last night on earth, what would you do? I’m not talking about a crazy night out on the town with your friends kind of thing, I am talking about the fact that in less than 24 hours you will be shuffled off of the mortal coil and embark on a journey into the undiscovered country. Would you make amends with God? Would you contact your family? Would you tell your family about your imminent demise? Would you try and somehow avert the inevitable? Would you do something you have always wanted to do but didn’t because of the cost, danger, social stigma, etc?

Second, how would you feel about your life as it has been lived? Do you feel that you would have any regrets about actions untaken or would you lament things you did do but knew you shouldn’t have? Do you think you have had an impact despite the shortness of your life or that you would be missed? To me these questions are the more insightful because I think by contemplating our own mortality we might be able to assess the shortfalls in the way we live our lives.

Third, would it change your opinion on what this whole thing called life has meant? Knowing that you are about to either move onto the next plane of existence or become one with nothingness, depending on your philosophical beliefs, would you become more likely to change your beliefs, question them, or stick to them ever more fervently?

Lastly, what would the impact be on our lives be if we lived every day like it was our last? Would it be good, bad, or dangerous?

She's living, living next week now
You know she's going to pay it back somehow
She hasn't been to bed in a week
She'll be dead soon then she'll sleep