From: martillo@stars.clearpoint.com (Joachim Martillo)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.mideast
Subject: Re: BILL CLINTON ON ISRAEL AND THE MIDDLE
Date: 26 Aug 92 15:16:22 GMT
Organization: Clearpoint Inc., Hopkinton, MA

In article <1992Aug26.130502.8077@dscomsf.desy.de> Hallam@zeus02.desy.de writes:

>1) It is not for us in the West to decide the forms of government that other
>people live under

Why not?  The West is certainly powerful enough to impose whatever it
wishes on a large part of the world.  The reason is not that the West
is so good but that the rest of the world is so stupid and clings to
the remnants of mindlessly stupid Latin American, African, Middle
Eastern, Indic and East Asian traditional cultures or to equally
mindlessly stupid communist practices.  In any case, is it any more
legitimate for a disgusting coterie of uncivilized thugs to decide the
forms of government under which people outside the first world live?

>2) Despite this it is nevertheless legitimate to criticize other countries
>governments for actions which deny human rights.

Why would we want to criticize if we did not want to impose our norms
on the savages?  In any case merely addressing the concept of human
rights is a Western imposition which is completely alien to mindlessly
stupid Latin American, African, Middle Eastern, Indic and East Asian
traditional cultures and to equally mindlessly stupid Communist
systems.

>3) In both cases the point at issue was not the introduction or preservation of
>democracy. The US backed up the previous dictatorships in both countries. 

So what?  US policy-makers concluded working with some non-democratic
countries was reasonable under the circumstances.

>4) If the people of either country desired their government to be changed by
>force they would back the movements which aim to change the government by this
>means and the communists would fall. If they do not replacing the government by
>force will achieve nothing, democracy cannot be imposed.

A completely ignorant and naive point of view.  Did you ever hear of
Tiananmen Square? Or the 1956 Hungarian rebellion?  Unpopular
governments with the will and means can crush rebellions.  Also the
development of civilized modernism in the West actually was a forceful
imposition on traditional masses of a new cultural system by an elite
which was disgusted by pre-modern European culture.  There was no
democracy involved at all.

>5) Communism is an unstable form of government. It's continuance requires a
>poweful and charismatic leader. Once Castro has gone Cuba will undergo peacefull
>change, a revolution would merely replace Castro with another dictator.

A completely uncorrellated statement.  Soviet Communism lasted longer
than the First French Republic.  Maybe democracy is less stable than
communism.  It might be that when there are many monarchies,
monarchies are stable, the more democracies, the more stable
democracies become and perhaps if the Soviet and Chinese communists
had managed to continue expanding, the communist systems would have
become more stable.

If such is the case, we in the civilized West who wish to continue to
enjoy the benefits of the civilized West must stabilize the civilized
West by expanding the civilized West to the point where it supplants
mindlessly stupid Latin American, African, Middle Eastern, Indic and
East Asian cultures as well as overthrows the remaining communist
states.

>Phill Hallam-Baker

--
Joachim Carlo Santos Martillo Ajami

The article represents noone's opinions other than the author's.
Newsgroups: talk.politics.mideast