0 members (),
96
guests, and
55
robots. |
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
S |
M |
T |
W |
T |
F |
S |
|
|
|
1
|
2
|
3
|
4
|
5
|
6
|
7
|
8
|
9
|
10
|
11
|
12
|
13
|
14
|
15
|
16
|
17
|
18
|
19
|
20
|
21
|
22
|
23
|
24
|
25
|
26
|
27
|
28
|
29
|
30
|
31
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2011
Posts: 2,007
Member
|
Member
Joined: Jul 2011
Posts: 2,007 |
Quote "our" Jon Law:
Let me know when financial bubbles start creating enduring prosperity instead of manias, panics, and crashes.
No, I meant more like they're the scout camp, going to foreign places, seeing beautiful people and exotic things and.... Not blowing them up. I respect and thank our military, don't take that the wrong way. I wouldn't call corporations saints (more like outlaws) but... How have nations interacted throughout history. Uh huh. Globalization through the Banksters corporate dealings sure seems less violent than command and conquer new territories. And the countries get to keep their local governments. It's not paradise, but it's less bloody globalization. Oh, you're talking about the empire/world leader system of the West, meaning that since we won the last go-round, we pump wealth from them to us. The Spanish, Dutch, and British got to do that for a while, each in their own way. We're currently in the delegitimation phase where the hegemonic power of the world leader begins to wane after a period of free international action. See the British Empire circa 1900 for comparison. If the hegemon doesn't win the next Great Power struggle (vs. China (?) circa 2030-2040 (?)), that ends with a massive hangover in the formerly hegemonic nation.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2011
Posts: 332
Member
|
OP
Member
Joined: Jul 2011
Posts: 332 |
Quote "our" Jon Law:
Let me know when financial bubbles start creating enduring prosperity instead of manias, panics, and crashes.
No, I meant more like they're the scout camp, going to foreign places, seeing beautiful people and exotic things and.... Not blowing them up. I respect and thank our military, don't take that the wrong way. I wouldn't call corporations saints (more like outlaws) but... How have nations interacted throughout history. Uh huh. Globalization through the Banksters corporate dealings sure seems less violent than command and conquer new territories. And the countries get to keep their local governments. It's not paradise, but it's less bloody globalization. Oh, you're talking about the empire/world leader system of the West, meaning that since we won the last go-round, we pump wealth from them to us. The Spanish, Dutch, and British got to do that for a while, each in their own way. We're currently in the delegitimation phase where the hegemonic power of the world leader begins to wane after a period of free international action. See the British Empire circa 1900 for comparison. If the hegemon doesn't win the next Great Power struggle (vs. China (?) circa 2030-2040 (?)), that ends with a massive hangover in the formerly hegemonic nation. No, because these corporations really are international at this point and they are not just from the US... Some of them are from other European countries, Asian countries, etc. It isn't exclusively a Western thing, imo. I do somewhat disagree that "Globalization through the Banksters corporate dealings sure seems less violent than command and conquer new territories." .... because sometimes they interfere and cause huge problems in the country they've entered into. Huge problems that lead to uprisings and that even fuel civil war. Corporations are in bed with governments all over the world, so I also don't think they have entirely separate interests. It is just a little harder to see what's going on. Also, when the World Bank lends money to a poor country (like Haiti) and then makes up rules about how that country must accept imports (in bed with corporations)... the system can actually destroy that country's ability to sustain itself and even have its own independent government that doesn't rely on aid more and more.
Last edited by islandofapples; 02/20/12 03:50 PM.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2011
Posts: 2,007
Member
|
Member
Joined: Jul 2011
Posts: 2,007 |
I'm not saying that French companies don't benefit the French and that German companies don't benefit the Germans and that the Chinese companies don't benefit the Chinese.
What' I'm saying is that the U.S. gets the most benefit from the current arrangement. Because it is a U.S. system. Built by the U.S. after WWII. Those bajillion military everywhere people always talk about? See WWII and the Cold War for details.
Do you think that 5% of the global population is consuming 25% of global energy by accident?
The U.S. won the Cold War, so it gets to be the "hyperpower" for a little while until someone challenges it, which hasn't happened yet, but always happens because nations tend to behave in a rather predictable fashion and since about 1500 it's been working in a particularly Western pattern.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2011
Posts: 332
Member
|
OP
Member
Joined: Jul 2011
Posts: 332 |
I'm not saying that French companies don't benefit the French and that German companies don't benefit the Germans and that the Chinese companies don't benefit the Chinese.
What' I'm saying is that the U.S. gets the most benefit from the current arrangement. Because it is a U.S. system. Built by the U.S. after WWII. Those bajillion military everywhere people always talk about? See WWII and the Cold War for details.
Do you think that 5% of the global population is consuming 25% of global energy by accident?
The U.S. won the Cold War, so it gets to be the "hyperpower" for a little while until someone challenges it, which hasn't happened yet, but always happens because nations tend to behave in a rather predictable fashion and since about 1500 it's been working in a particularly Western pattern. Well, since all the biggest nations are completely wrapped up in one another's economies now, I do wonder if they'll want to even engage in war. Anyway, this is way off where we were taking this. Do gifted people have a responsibility to lead by example if they are the ones in power now? And what kind of example?
|
|
|
|
|