Earlier quoted context omitted.
Removed by whom?
I suppose that's one of the UNs weakness in that they lack the ability to enforce a lot of conventions.
And to put whom in power instead of him? It doesn't work.
Zimbabwe's Military in Apparent Takeover, Says It Has Custody of President
41–50 of 84 posts
Re: Zimbabwe's Military in Apparent Takeover, Says It Has Custody of President
#42Earlier quoted context omitted.
Removed by whom?
I suppose that's one of the UNs weakness in that they lack the ability to enforce a lot of conventions.
A world government with a force would be an interesting concept. Corrupt African states has lead to their citizens fleeing to Europe with EU solutions being band-aids like giving Libyan coast guard ships and money to prevent the ships from leaving Libyan waters, the better solution would be to fix corruption and help development in the refugees' home countries, but the EU governments can't do that, can they (giving the governments money would just mean the leaders would be able to afford a new villa and a few more Mercedes Benzes).
Re: Zimbabwe's Military in Apparent Takeover, Says It Has Custody of President
#43Re: Zimbabwe's Military in Apparent Takeover, Says It Has Custody of President
#44There have been several coups or other undemocratic assumptions of power recently: Saudi Arabia, Lebanon, China (Xi seems to have made himself dictator-for-life), Turkey, and to a degree in Japan, in at least one Eastern European country, and even in France (which AFAIK now has an indefinite state of emergency curtailing rights of citizens). I wonder how much and in what way they are related to the U.S. changing its…
First of all, please don't call the U.S. the "guarantor of international order". It sounds as if the U.S. were a benefactor to the world. It is not, it has been all political alliances and power-play. Sometimes the U.S. backed democratic leaders, sometimes not (c.f. Pinochet, Park Chung Hee...). Second, I myself consider the degradation of the current state of affairs in the world to be due to the global slowdown of…
Not just less growth, but also an increasing wealth-gap. Wealth gap will lead to increasingly dangerous conditions.
Re: Zimbabwe's Military in Apparent Takeover, Says It Has Custody of President
#45Earlier quoted context omitted.
I suppose that's one of the UNs weakness in that they lack the ability to enforce a lot of conventions.
A world government with a force would be an interesting concept. Corrupt African states has lead to their citizens fleeing to Europe with EU solutions being band-aids like giving Libyan coast guard ships and money to prevent the ships from leaving Libyan waters, the better solution would be to fix corruption and help development in the refugees' home countries, but the EU governments can't do that, can they (giving t…
They could directly invest in infrastructure (coupled with suitably sized bribes, which can be kept to a small portion when done directly), which is what China is doing.
But they'd get accused of colonialism if they actually tried to help directly like that (and perhaps it would be true). So they're left in the untenable position of dealing with mass migration or funding warlords.
Re: Zimbabwe's Military in Apparent Takeover, Says It Has Custody of President
#46These African countries always remind me of Darwin's Nightmare[0]. There is an interview with Raphael at 1:20:41 in which he says he wants a war because he can earn more money then.
Re: Zimbabwe's Military in Apparent Takeover, Says It Has Custody of President
#47There have been several coups or other undemocratic assumptions of power recently: Saudi Arabia, Lebanon, China (Xi seems to have made himself dictator-for-life), Turkey, and to a degree in Japan, in at least one Eastern European country, and even in France (which AFAIK now has an indefinite state of emergency curtailing rights of citizens). I wonder how much and in what way they are related to the U.S. changing its…
First of all, please don't call the U.S. the "guarantor of international order". It sounds as if the U.S. were a benefactor to the world. It is not, it has been all political alliances and power-play. Sometimes the U.S. backed democratic leaders, sometimes not (c.f. Pinochet, Park Chung Hee...). Second, I myself consider the degradation of the current state of affairs in the world to be due to the global slowdown of…
While the US often acts reprehensibly, such as in the case of Chile, Iraq, and so on, the overwhelming majority of the international influence the US exerts is positive. The entire stability of Europe, Japan, South Korea (although Park Chung Hee was a dictator), and a handful of other countries was built by the US government. Counter-examples are easy to list, but somehow the more numerous positive examples are forgotten.
And what are you basing the "global slowdown of economic growth" on? Gross World Product has been growing at around 3% since the second world war, and hasn't slowed down recently at all: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gross_world_product And particularly, Africa is growing faster than anywhere else.
Re: Zimbabwe's Military in Apparent Takeover, Says It Has Custody of President
#48Earlier quoted context omitted.
First of all, please don't call the U.S. the "guarantor of international order". It sounds as if the U.S. were a benefactor to the world. It is not, it has been all political alliances and power-play. Sometimes the U.S. backed democratic leaders, sometimes not (c.f. Pinochet, Park Chung Hee...). Second, I myself consider the degradation of the current state of affairs in the world to be due to the global slowdown of…
Not just less growth, but also an increasing wealth-gap. Wealth gap will lead to increasingly dangerous conditions.
Tangent, but...
I'm actually curious if the wealth gap is part of what caused the slowdown -- the super rich got greedy, ate into their seed corn by taking too much wealth from the productive parts of the system, and now won't make the massive investments and restructuring of intake from them necessary to restore the system.
Re: Zimbabwe's Military in Apparent Takeover, Says It Has Custody of President
#49Earlier quoted context omitted.
> This doesn't look good. Who for? The situation in Zimbabwe is bad enough that things could hardly get much worse. Worst case, one corrupt dictator gets replaced by a different successor than would otherwise have been the case. It's not like a military junta could be less democratic or more corrupt than the existing regime, after all.
I'd not be so sure. It can almost always get worse.
While that is true, there is more room for improvement in Zimbabwe than there is in most countries.
Re: Zimbabwe's Military in Apparent Takeover, Says It Has Custody of President
#50Earlier quoted context omitted.
First of all, please don't call the U.S. the "guarantor of international order". It sounds as if the U.S. were a benefactor to the world. It is not, it has been all political alliances and power-play. Sometimes the U.S. backed democratic leaders, sometimes not (c.f. Pinochet, Park Chung Hee...). Second, I myself consider the degradation of the current state of affairs in the world to be due to the global slowdown of…
While the US often acts reprehensibly, such as in the case of Chile, Iraq, and so on, the overwhelming majority of the international influence the US exerts is positive. The entire stability of Europe, Japan, South Korea (although Park Chung Hee was a dictator), and a handful of other countries was built by the US government. Counter-examples are easy to list, but somehow the more numerous positive examples are forgo…
You talk as if I am forgetting the positive contributions of U.S. interventions, but I clearly specified that sometimes the U.S. contributed to democracy, sometimes not. My point was the U.S. did not do this out of pure goodwill, but to preserve their political alliances and world leader position.
It is fair to discuss if the global economic growth is slowing or not. I still think that is the case, excluding China, India and Africa. And that the GDP growth is not a good number for this, as it can be artificially inflated by government policies, without increasing the median income/buying power of the population.