I dont think ISIS could ever be considered as democratic sovereign state?
Meaning, what you are pointing out is not democratic sovereign nations imposing their economic and political interests over other democratic sovereign nations
Of course ISIS is not a democratic sovereign state. Why on earth are you making that point?
Arabia was heading towards democracy after the First World War. The majority tribe were the Hashemite’s, the people who currently run Jordan. They are decedents of the Prophet Mohammed and were moderate and open to representative parliaments in the region. Women went to school and college, could own property, were able to drive, help high office and were much better treated than their female great grandchildren. The British and French feared Pan-Arab nationalism so they backed the illiterate, nomadic, barbaric house of Saud who practiced an extremist form of Islam called Wahhabism. Abdulaziz bin Abdul Rahman Al Saud, whose father was exiled to the British Protectorate of Kuwait, got support from Britain, via the Emer of Kuwait, to invade Arabia just as his father did. Once he was successful in capturing Riyadh his backing increased. They engaged in a brutal war of conquest which killed hundreds of thousands of people died (Recent books cite 400,000 to 800,000 but the British Journal of Middle Eastern Studies disputed these numbers). His family have created one of the most evil and oppressive States in the world. It is a creation of the UK, France and, later, the USA.
If America is just doing what everyone does if they can, what makes it any different from the tyrannical empires of the past?
Nothing, other than they are far more measured and restrained. No country as powerful as them has ever abused their power less. That’s not to say they don’t abuse it!
To me, what makes it different, is the principles of representative democracy built on the rule of law that it has adopted. Inherent to that is attribution of fundamental rights, to free speech, to dissent, to trade etc.
If its government starts to act in a manner which usurps those principles, then you are right, it is acting no different to the tyrannical empires of the past.
Okay, so we all do that in whatever way we can. We steak taxes, turn away immigrants, profit from cheap oil and gas, support European agricultural policies which impoverish tens of millions and cause massive environmental damage around the world. We don’t sent our army because we don’t have one worth sending but we live in and profit from the world created by the Western Powers. If you don’t like that then wait a few decades and see if you like the world created by the eastern Powers any better.
I dont think it needs to do this. I dont it is to blame for what is happening in Venezuela, I just dont think its position of imposing economic sanctions and threatening possible military intervention is justifiable, reasonable or appropriate in this instance.
Either do I but it has nothing to do with capitalism or corporatism.
The people of Venezuela have voted for radical change. The resolution to the Venezuelan crisis is to understand why they voted for radical change in the first instance and then set about resolving the issues that led to that change.
No it isn’t. The solution is boring stuff like a proper functioning civil service, an independent police and judiciary, a proper education system, real freedom of the Press, a balanced economy and patience, lots and lots of patience. Read up on “The Dutch Disease”. That’s what caused the problem.
